International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC)

WORKING FOR THE SOCIAL DIMENSION OF THE

ASIA – EUROPE MEETING (ASEM)

BACKGROUND DOCUMENT TO

ASEM Trade Union Summit 2008

Trade unions’ input to the 2nd ASEM Labour and Employment Ministers Meeting

October 12-14, 2008 Bali, Indonesia

ASEM Trade Union Summit (October 12-14, 2008, Bali, Indonesia)

CONTENTSparagraphBACKGROUND DOCUMENT TO..........................................................................1CONTENTS...........................................................................................................2London Summit 1998.............................................................................................5Seoul Summit 2000................................................................................................6Copenhagen Summit 2002.....................................................................................6THE AEPF, THE AEBF AND ASEF.....................................................................20PARALLELS FOR ASEM IN THE INTERNATIONAL ARENA..............................22GLOSSARY.........................................................................................................24Developments in main policy areas over 2005-2008: 6th ASEM Economic Ministers' Meeting...........................................................51-537th ASEM Finance Ministers' Meeting .............................................................54-581st ASEM Labour and Employment Ministers Meeting.....................................59-663rd ASEM Environment Ministers’ Meeting......................................................................678th ASEM Foreign Ministers’ Meeting.........................................................................68-73ASEM Senior Labour Officials Meeting ..........................................................74-788th ASEM Finance Ministers’ Meeting........................................................................79-825th Asian-Europe Parliamentary Partnership Meeting (ASEP)..................................... 83-861st Social Partners Forum..............................................................................................87-91

Trade unions in the ASEM process Bangkok Summit 1996......................................................................................................92London Summit 1998 ..................................................................................................93-94Seoul Summit 2000 .....................................................................................................95-97Copenhagen Summit 2002..........................................................................................98-103Hanoi Summit 2004..................................................................................................104-109Helsinki Summit 2006..............................................................................................110-113Djakarta Conference 2007........................................................................................114-116Other ASEM fora ............................................................................................................117

The AEPF, the AEBF and ASEFAsia Europe People’s Forum (AEPF)...................................................................... 118-123Asia Europe Business Forum (AEBF).............................................................................124Asia Europe Foundation (ASEF)..............................................................................125-127

Parallels for ASEM in the International Arena...........................................................128-130

Conclusions.....................................................................................................................131-132

GlossaryAnnex I: Chairman’s conclusions of the 1st ASEM Labour and Employment Ministers Conference: “More and Better Jobs: Working jointly to strengthen the social dimension of Globalisation”Annex II: Trade Union Statement to the Senior Labour Officials’ Meeting, Yogyakarta, 12-13 September 2007 Annex III: Chairman’s Summary of the Senior Labour Officials’ Meeting (Preparatory Meeting for the 2nd ASEM Labour and Employment Ministers’ Conference), Yogyakarta, 12 – 13 September 2007Annex IV: Summary report of the 1st ASEM Social Partners Forum, Brussels, 30 June – 1 July 2008

INTRODUCTION

2

1. Since the inception of the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) in the year 1996 in Bangkok, the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and its predecessor and regional organisations, together with the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) and in cooperation with the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, have been engaged actively in seeking to include a social pillar into the ASEM process.

2. After intensive lobbying, the Heads of States agreed to add a social pillar to the ASEM process by establishing a regular dialogue of Ministers of Labour and Employment of all ASEM countries. The first such meeting was held in September 2006 in Potsdam on the invitation of the German government under the title “More and Better Jobs – Working Jointly to Strengthen the Social Dimension of Globalisation”. The second ASEM labour ministers meeting will be held from October 13 to 15, 2008 in Bali, Indonesia.

3. Employment and social security have been topics on the ASEM agenda since the Copenhagen ASEM Summit of 2002. At their meeting in Hanoi in October 2004, ASEM Heads of State and Governments emphasised the significance of enhanced co-operation in this field of political action, taking up the recommendations of the preceding ASEM Trade Union Dialogue in Hanoi. Thereafter, the ASEM Foreign Ministers endorsed the first Labour and Employment Ministers Conference (LEMC) at their Kyoto meeting in May 2005. The first meeting of ASEM labour and employment ministers added an important element to the European-Asian dialogue: discussions of labour and employment in the context of the social dimension of globalisation. It therefore seems that ASEM leaders have realised that globalisation in itself does not guarantee development, jobs and prosperity for all – and that, indeed, it brings many problems with it. Limiting such negative aspects of globalisation and making its benefits available to as many people as possible will require pro-active measures.

4. The resolution passed by the first Labour and Employment Ministers’ meeting called for compliance with international labour standards and for including the social partners - trade unions and employers - in the further development of an ASEM Social Pillar. This was endorsed by the 2006 ASEM Heads of State and Governments meeting in Helsinki.

5. The 2nd Labour and Employment Ministers Conference (LEMC) will be held in Bali on October

14-16 2008 under the theme “More and Better Jobs – Strengthening Partnership to take advantage from Global Labour Market toward Decent Work”. A preparatory Senior Labour Officials Meeting (SLOM) was held in Yogjakarta, Indonesia in September 2007. On that occasion the trade unions from Europe and Asia met before the SLOM and issued a statement including 10 recommendations for an ASEM social agenda.

6. A 1st Social Partners’ Forum was held in Brussels on June 30th and July 1st 2008 organised by the European Commission. During the Forum, the EU Commissioner for social affairs underlined the key role played by the social partners in helping to secure a fair distribution of the gains from globalisation. The contribution of the social partners to the promotion of the ILO decent work agenda was equally underlined.

7. The Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES) is highly committed to support trade unions’ involvement in ASEM. In coordination with the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and its regional organisations for Asia and the Pacific, the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), the Confederation of Indonesian Trade Unions (CITU) and the Confederation of Indonesian Prosperity Labour Unions (KSBSI), trade unions from Europe and Asia will meet again for a Summit on October 12-14, 2008 in Bali. The main objective of this Trade Union Summit is to convince ASEM leaders of the need to provide trade unions with the same consultative status as employers’ organisations within ASEM.

3

8. This document aims to provide background information on the recent history and development of ASEM, both concerning the official meetings and the trade union involvement. Also included are parallels of potential use for the campaign to achieve a greater role for unions in the official ASEM process.

OFFICIAL ASEM SUMMITS

Bangkok Summit 1996

9. ASEM initially consisted of the 15 members of the European Union (EU), (Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Belgium, France, United Kingdom, Ireland, Austria, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece) plus the European Commission; and ten Asian countries (Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam, China, Japan and Korea). It was expanded in 2004 to include the ten countries that joined the EU on 1 May 2004 - Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia - and three new members of ASEAN - Burma (Myanmar), Cambodia and Laos. In 2006, it was agreed that five more countries – Bulgaria, Romania, India, Mongolia and Pakistan - would formally be accepted into membership at the 2008 Beijing Summit, bringing ASEM’s total membership to 43 country members, as well as the European Commission and ASEAN.

10. ASEM grew out of an earlier and continuing series of EU/ASEAN meetings. ASEM is essentially a process for organised inter-regional discussions at various levels on issues of agreed common concern. It is steered by foreign ministers who prepare the Summits of ASEM Heads of State and Government. In addition to the heads of state meetings, there are regular meetings at both ministerial level and that of senior officials, to discuss trade, finance, investment, customs, security, technology and environmental issues. In 2006, as mentioned above, the first-ever such meeting of labour and employment ministers took place.

11. The major initial Asian developing country government interest in the arrangement was to counterbalance the weight of US and Japanese trade and investment in their countries. For the European Union it was to develop ties with a big and fast growing region as a parallel to the APEC process. The clear motivation for both was business.

12. The Chairman’s Statement of the first ASEM meeting in Bangkok articulated the meeting in terms of three distinct dimensions of co-operation. These dimensions, according to which the ASEM process is effectively organised, are the political, the economic, and the other, which has come to be known as the cultural. The political dimension is a forum to discuss regional and international security issues, topics such as non-proliferation and disarmament, and to use political dialogue and co-operation to work toward peace, stability and prosperity. The economic dimension is primarily a vehicle for establishing greater inter-regional trade and investment. In this context, the WTO is a main focus.

13. The 1996 founding meeting in Bangkok was itself recognition of the economic potential of increased co-operation between the two regions. The leaders agreed that economic links were the basis for inter-regional partnership, and that to further this partnership, they would strive to increase two-way trade and investment flows. In contrast to APEC1, there has never been any suggestion that ASEM could become the basis for a free trade area; rather, the emphasis has continually been on trade promotion through boosting the multilateral trading system.

1 The Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum brings together most of the countries surrounding the Pacific Rim, including those both on the Asian side of the Pacific and those in the Americas that border the Pacific.

4

14. The Asia-Europe Business Forum (AEBF) was established at ASEM I. The AEBF has held regular interactions with Ministers and other government representatives and is closely involved with the ASEM Summit process.

15. The third thematic group is essentially the catch-all for whatever does not fall within either of the other two groupings. While listed in the Chairman’s report from the Bangkok Summit under co-operation in other areas, human resource development is considered an important component of economic co-operation. Also in this grouping, as a matter for co-operation, but not considered economic or political, is development co-operation, with priority to poverty alleviation, public health and gender issues, and environmental issues. Many of the initiatives in this grouping are described as cultural, a major focus being to bring the regions’ citizens closer through cultural exchanges such as tourism, the arts, and student or youth oriented activities.

16. The Leaders left Bangkok having agreed to follow up on numerous initiatives, including various Ministerial and Senior Officials’ Meetings (SOM) to monitor the follow up. The Leaders agreed that these intergovernmental meetings, and indeed the ASEM process as a whole, need not be institutionalised (again, by contrast with APEC, which has a small secretariat based in Singapore). The Senior Officials Meeting on Trade and Investment (SOMTI) was charged with finding specific ways of boosting trade and investment, and a joint Government and Private Sector group was convened to draw up an Investment Promotion Action Plan (IPAP). The draft IPAP was first disseminated at the first meeting of the Business Forum, and then edited to reflect the forum’s views before being submitted to ASEM members. At the first SOMTI in July 1996, officials agreed to draft a Trade Facilitation Action Plan (TFAP). Customs and quarantine procedures, standards, intellectual property rights and business travel were identified as some initial priorities of TFAP. It was decided to use the existing fora of SOMTI and the Asia Europe Business Forum (AEBF) to further develop TFAP.

London Summit 1998

17. In the nine months before the ASEM II London Summit in April 1998, the Asian financial and economic crisis caused turmoil primarily in East Asian countries. A massive outflow of portfolio investment capital occurred, leaving depreciated local currencies, very high interest rates, countless defaulted loans, and no investor confidence. This produced rapidly rising unemployment and a fiscal crunch that dragged the region into a recession. When ASEM Leaders met in London, this situation was the main pre-occupation.

18. ASEM II adopted a statement on the response to the crisis, entitled A shared interest in restoring stability, and set up the ASEM Trust Fund (ATF) at the World Bank to assist the stricken economies. The ATF expired in December 2006.

19. The report stressed the concern of the ASEM Leaders about the human cost of the crisis, and suggested that affordable social safety nets be developed. They suggested that it would be important to protect social expenditure where possible from the comprehensive economic reform programmes they suggested. Most reforms suggested in the statement were concerned with the transparency of the financial system and the means of attracting foreign capital back into the region, not with the fundamental causes of the crisis nor its social consequences.

20. The Chairman’s Statement of ASEM II tasked the Meeting of Economic Ministers with closely supervising the early implementation of both the TFAP and IPAP. In addition to the concern about the Asian Crisis, the Leaders affirmed their support for the WTO as the main forum for trade dialogue, and stressed the importance of fully implementing all existing WTO commitments.

21. A delegation of CEO’s and business representatives met with the ASEM Leaders and the Leaders acknowledged how important the AEBF had been in promoting economic co-operation. In order to

5

make the high-level meeting possible, the 3rd meeting of the AEBF had been held on the eve of ASEM II. The AEBF was expected to continue its efforts to increase the profile of SME’s in their activities.

22. Concerning co-operation on what the Chairman’s Statement termed Global Issues, the Leaders agreed to work together on human resource development, poverty, food supply, the welfare of women and children, the fight against drugs and international crime, community health, employment, the environment and sustainable development. In terms of specific initiatives in this area, a meeting of experts was held in London at the end of 1998 to co-operate on child welfare issues, and a follow-up meeting of police and enforcement agencies was held in Seoul in 2000. An Environmental Technology Centre was launched in Thailand.

23. In the closing statement from London, the Leaders reaffirmed that ASEM was an informal process and adopted a Co-operation Framework (AECF) as a focus for ASEM activities and methodology for the development of new initiatives. This Framework formalised the stewardship of the co-ordinators’ meeting of ministers and senior officials. The Leaders commissioned a Vision Group to develop a long-term plan for the ASEM process, with a report to be discussed at ASEM III.

Seoul Summit 2000

24. The 3rd ASEM Summit was held in Seoul on 20-21 October 2000, addressing inter alia the future directions of the ASEM process into the first decade of the new century. ASEM III adopted a Chairman’s Statement, the Asia-Europe Cooperation Framework (AECF) 2000 and a Seoul Declaration for Peace on the Korean Peninsula. The Asia-Europe Cooperation Framework (AECF) was updated by leaders at the Seoul Summit.

25. The AECF provided that the ASEM process should “go beyond governments in order to promote dialogue and cooperation between the business/private sectors of the two regions and, no less importantly, between the people of the two regions.” It stressed that ASEM operates on the basis of consensus. This means that any proposed initiative must receive the support of all ASEM members.

26. The Chairman’s Statement reaffirmed a commitment of all ASEM members to strengthening cooperation between the two regions, in line with priorities identified in the AECF. Leaders agreed on the need to ensure that the benefits of globalisation are widely shared while reducing its adverse effect. Leaders underlined the importance of social and human resource development, including life-long learning, for the alleviation of economic and social disparities. They confirmed their intention to enhance social safety nets to promote the welfare of the socially vulnerable.

Copenhagen Summit 2002

27. The 4th ASEM Summit was held in Copenhagen from 23-24 September 2004. The Summit adopted at the end a Declaration on Cooperation against International Terrorism and a Cooperation Programme on Fighting International Terrorism, as well as a Political Declaration for Peace on the Korean Peninsula.

28. Leaders discussed Iraq and the situation in the Middle East, took note of perspectives for EU enlargement and the resulting positive outlook for the global economy, commended the EU for the successful introduction of the Euro and acknowledged the progress made in Asia, such as ASEAN+3 and the Asia Cooperation Dialogue. They underlined their resolve to fight international terrorism and emphasised that this should be based on the leading role of the UN and the principles of the UN Charter.

6

29. Leaders were briefed on recent developments on the Korean Peninsula, particularly the Japanese Prime Minister’s visit to North Korea and the upcoming talks on normalising relations between Tokyo and Pyongyang. They reaffirmed their support for the peaceful process of inter-Korean reconciliation and cooperation.

30. Leaders expressed their commitment to ‘a strong, transparent and fair multilateral trading system’ and underlined that the development dimension and the needs of the developing countries should continue to be a central component under the WTO work programme. They considered that the ASEM process constituted an effective means for consultation and dialogue on the WTO Round and therefore welcomed a new initiative for a flexible framework for consultation and dialogue on economic issues.

31. Leaders expressed their desire to deepen region-to-region economic cooperation, including through new steps aimed at ‘furthering economic integration between the two regions’. To this end, they agreed to set up a Taskforce composed of five experts from each of the two regions, in addition to work programmes already carried out under the Trade Facilitation Action Plan (TFAP) and Investment Promotion Action Plan (IPAP). The Taskforce should consider three areas: trade (to promote trade flows and reduce trade barriers); investment (to increase investment flows towards both regions, including Small and Medium-sized Enterprises' access to markets); and finance (to enhance financial cooperation including the full use of the Euro as a transaction and reserve currency and the creation of a Eurobond market in Asia, and to assess the Euro's impact on money markets).

32. In addressing adverse consequences of globalisation, Leaders emphasised the importance of human resource development and education as ‘factors for employability and alleviation of poverty’. They encouraged expansion of educational exchange among ASEM countries. They underlined the importance of the ASEM dialogue on environmental issues and reaffirmed their political will to implement the commitments made at the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg and to address climate change.

33. Leaders endorsed the holding of an ASEM Workshop on the Future of Employment and the Quality of Labour ‘in view of interplay between economic growth and progress in the social sphere and in order to ensure long-term social cohesion’, proposed by the German Government, which would introduce a social and employment dimension into the ASEM process and could involve the social partners. This initiative had been supported very much by trade unions in ASEM in their interventions to influence their governments concerning ASEM issues, as described in greater detail below.

Hanoi Summit 2004

34. The fifth Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM 5) was held in Hanoi on 8-9 October 2004 under the overarching theme: “Further Revitalising and Substantiating the Asia-Europe Partnership”.

35. The Summit was attended by the Heads of State and Government of thirteen Asian countries, twenty-five European Nations and the European Commission. The 10 new members of the EU (Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia) and 3 new ASEAN members (Cambodia, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, and Burma) were admitted.

36. The admission of Burma had been opposed strongly by much of civil society including the international trade union movement. In their statement, the Leaders called for an early lifting of restrictions placed on political parties in this country, supported the national reconciliation process and underlined that the National Convention should be an important element in the national reconciliation and democratisation process.

7

37. In view of this enlargement and possible further ones, the Leaders agreed to move towards enhanced cooperation frameworks with specific goals and result-oriented programmes and projects.

38. With regard to the political pillar, the Leaders reaffirmed their determination to address threats such as instability, terrorism, separatism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, transnational crimes, negative aspects of globalisation, the widening gap between rich and poor, infectious diseases, environmental degradation and climate change. They reaffirmed their strong commitment to multilateralism and to a fair, just and rule-based international order, with the United Nations playing the central role to deal with these challenges. The Leaders agreed that the fight against HIV/AIDS should feature in the framework of ASEM cooperation. They also underlined the need to reinforce ASEM cooperation in the field of international migration through concrete actions.

39. Concerning the economic pillar, the Leaders reaffirmed their determination to bring forward the Asia-Europe economic partnership to a new stage of comprehensive and forward-looking cooperation, and to this end adopted the “Hanoi Declaration on Closer ASEM Economic Partnership”. They agreed to expand cooperation in areas of common interest such as information and communication technology, the knowledge-based economy, energy, transport, tourism, intellectual property rights, small and medium enterprises, the promotion of sustainable economic growth, dialogue on employment, and the reduction of the development gap between ASEM partners.

40. The Leaders acknowledged the importance and potentials for Asia-Europe cooperation at all levels in various fields such as social development, labour and employment, education and training, public health and environment. They agreed to further expand and strengthen ASEM cooperation in these fields, and tasked Ministers to work out action- and result-oriented programmes to this end.

Helsinki Summit 2006

41. The sixth Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM 6) was held in Helsinki on 10-11 September 2006 under the overarching theme “10 Years of ASEM: Global Challenges Joint Responses”. The Helsinki Summit coincided with the 10th anniversary of the Asia Europe Meeting. It was attended by the Heads of State and Government of thirteen Asian countries, twenty-five European Nations and the European Commission. In their final statement the heads of state and government endorsed the Labour Ministers' Meeting recommendations formulated by Labour Ministers in Potsdam, Germany in September 2006 (see below). On labour and social issues, the conclusions of the ASEM 6 Helsinki Summit went further than ever before.

42. With regards to labour issues the chairperson’s statement underlined: “the need to sustain the substantive ASEM dialogue and cooperation in this field, including with social partners. Leaders also recognised the need to strengthen the social dimension globalisation, underlining that productive employment, decent work, the protection of the rights of all workers, and social cohesion are crucial for sustainable socioeconomic development.” The reference to the involvement of social partners in further ASEM work, although not defined in specific terms, represents a solid ground for the recognition of unions’ formal status within the ASEM structure. In addition, it is important that the need for a social dimension of globalisation was not only recognised, but that Leaders agreed to shape it through active labour market policies that promote decent work and workers’ rights.

43. Despite such positive development on labour and social issues, the Leaders’ statement maintained ASEM’s pro-business orientation; Leaders noted with satisfaction the recommendations of the

8

Asia-Europe Business Forum (AEBF) and emphasised the importance of further engaging the business sector as an active stakeholder in the ASEM process. However no mention was made of the Trade Union Summit held in Helsinki or of an enhanced workers’ organisations’ participation in the ASEM process.

44. The Helsinki Summit agreed a second Labour and Employment Ministers’ Meeting would be held in 2008 in Indonesia. By welcoming the organisation of a second Labour Ministers’ meeting, Leaders made a commitment to integrating a dialogue and cooperation on social issues within the highest level of the ASEM structure. In addition the Chairperson’s statement identified globalisation, competitiveness and structural changes in the global economy including finance, labour issues, education and human resource development as key policy areas on which ASEM should focus during the decade to come. The specific wording of the paragraph read:

“Recalling that structural adjustment is inherent to a changing global economy and that industries and people must be prepared to tackle it, Leaders underlined the need for active labour market policies. In this context, Leaders highlighted the importance of the first ASEM Labour and Employment Ministers' Conference in Germany in 2006 and its results, as well as the need to sustain the substantive ASEM dialogue and cooperation in this field, including with social partners. Leaders also recognised the need to strengthen the social dimension of globalisation, underlining that productive employment, decent work, the protection of the rights of all workers, and social cohesion are crucial for sustainable socio-economic development. They welcomed the Indonesian offer to host the second Ministerial Conference in 2008. Furthermore, Leaders underlined that countries stand to benefit from an orderly and managed process of international migration and agreed to take forward actively cooperation on migration between Asia and Europe, such as through the ASEM Director-General level meetings on migratory flows.” (Chairman’s Statement of the Sixth Asia-Europe Meeting, Helsinki, 10-11 September 2006, Par. 23)

45. Concerning Burma, ASEM Leaders expressed their “deep concern on the lack of tangible progress and lack of inclusiveness in the process towards national reconciliation and called for a transition via an inclusive process to a democratic government”. They called for the early lifting of restrictions placed on political parties, the early release of those placed under detention, and effective dialogue between all parties concerned. Although much of this language had been used before, it was the first time that an explicit reference to the release of those placed under detention was made.

46. Meeting on the day of the 9/11 anniversary, the Leaders agreed that “the fight against terrorism must be carried out in accordance with international law, in particular the UN Charter, respect of human rights, refugee law and international humanitarian law. They agreed that it is equally important to identify and address the conditions conducive to the spread of terrorism, as a means of preventing radicalisation and recruitment into violent extremism and rejected any attempts to associate terrorism with any religion, race, nationality, or ethnic group.”

47. The call of the Leaders for global health security provided a commitment to achieving the goal of universal access to comprehensive prevention programmes, treatment, care and support by 2010. In addition they explicitly mentioned their commitment to facilitating access to antiretroviral treatment in the developing world and stressed the importance of honouring commitments made at relevant international pledging conferences as well as the implementation of the recently revised International Health Regulations.

48. With regard to trade issues, Leaders highlighted the need for greater flexibility to be accorded to developing and least developed countries, and supported Vietnam's entry into the WTO by November 2006 as well as an early accession of Laos. They further emphasised the need for improvements in market access to be undertaken on a multilateral basis, in parallel with steps to enhance regional or bilateral trade. In this context, ASEM Leaders called for improvement and clarification of the rules applicable to regional trade agreements in the WTO.

9

49. The Helsinki Summit welcomed the next ASEM enlargement with Bulgaria and Romania on the European side, and India, Mongolia, Pakistan on the Asian side, as well as the ASEAN secretariat. The heads of state and government also endorsed a Declaration on Climate Change, a Declaration on the Future of ASEM and a document on “ASEM Working Methods and Institutional Mechanisms”.

50. Finally when addressing the future of ASEM, leaders stated that ASEM should start its second decade by focusing on key policy areas such as “strengthening multilateralism and addressing global threats of common concern; globalisation, competitiveness and structural changes in the global economy including finance, labour issues, education and human resource development; health; science and technology including Information and Communication Technology (ICT); sustainable development with special focus on the MDG's, climate change, environment, and energy; and intercultural and Interfaith Dialogue as a means to promote mutual understanding”. A work programme for 2006-2008 was adopted.

Beijing Summit 2008

51. This 7th ASEM Leaders’ summit will take place on 24 and 25 October 2008 in China. It will be the first gathering of the leaders of 45 ASEM partners (43 countries, the EU and the ASEAN Secretariat) since its last enlargement in 2007. The overarching theme of ASEM 7 is 'Vision and Action: Towards a Win-Win Solution'. At the summit ASEM leaders will focus their discussions on political, economic and social and cultural issues, including issues related to sustainable development.

DEVELOPMENTS IN MAIN ASEM POLICY AREAS OVER 2005-2007

6th ASEM Economic Ministers' Meeting Rotterdam, the Netherlands, September 2005

52. The Netherlands refused to grant a visa to Burma’s economics minister, Soe Tha, for this meeting on the grounds of the massive human rights violation in his country. To protest against this measure, Asian governments decided not to send their ministers to Rotterdam. Therefore high level civil servants attended the meeting.

53. ASEM partners endorsed three new initiatives, namely, a forum and exhibition on tourism and investment co-operation to be organised by China, a seminar on tourism to be organised by Portugal, and a seminar on energy to be co-organised by Japan and the European Commission. Moreover, ASEM partners welcomed the offer by China to host the fifth ASEM E-Commerce Conference in 2006.

54. They further expressed their undiminished commitment to an ambitious and balanced outcome of the Doha Development Agenda in 2006, which they considered a unique opportunity to further liberalise trade whilst supporting development on the basis of stronger multilateral rules.

7th ASEM Finance Ministers Meeting, Vienna, Austria, April 2006

55. Ministers noted that global imbalances had widened since their last meeting and stressed the importance of reducing these imbalances. To this end, they recognised the need for a multi-pronged approach involving all countries concerned to implement appropriate policies to contribute to an orderly global readjustment.

10

56. Ministers had a detailed discussion on opportunities and challenges posed by the process of globalisation and the emerging international division of labour. They agreed that the key to seizing the opportunities is a climate conducive to business and infrastructure investment, flexible product and labour markets, abundance of adequately qualified labour, functioning financial markets and a policy focus on education and research and development. Of equal importance to tackle the challenges is an adequate system of social protection, with a focus on empowering disadvantaged and vulnerable groups.

57. Ministers concurred that adequate protection of vulnerable groups both in developed and less developed countries does not only have social and humanitarian value, but that a well designed system can enhance incentives to work and support productivity growth. A functioning social safety net, which enhances the right balance between security and flexibility, can also help secure broad and sustained support for an open and liberal system. They welcomed, in the ASEM context, the exchange of best practices regarding labour market flexibility and social protection systems.

58. Ministers agreed that both countries of origin and destination of migration have to safeguard smooth and orderly migration flows, combat human trafficking and exploitation of migrants.

59. Ministers agreed that additional progress was needed in the following areas:

• To successfully conclude the WTO Doha Development Agenda• To make progress with the timely attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)• To develop adequate communication strategies in order to increase understanding and acceptance of

policies promoting globalisation.

1st Labour and Employment Ministers’ Meeting, Potsdam, Germany, September 2006

60. This meeting was the result of an earlier initiative on employment and labour which had been proposed by the German government and co-sponsored by Ireland, Spain and China. As a preparatory measure, the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (FES), in cooperation with the Chinese ministry of labour and social affairs and the German ministry of economics and labour, organised an ASEM informal workshop in Beijing in November 2003 to discuss growth and social development in ASEM with governments, trade unions and other civil society representatives. The FES then organised a roundtable discussion in March 2004 in Brussels for the German Ministry to introduce a proposal for a ministerial-level meeting. These meetings were followed by an FES-organised seminar in cooperation with the Vietnamese Ministry of Labour, Invalids and Social Affairs (MOLISA) on 22-23 April 2004 in Hanoi, with participation of many trade union representatives.

61. In May 2006, the FES (Friedrich Ebert Stiftung) and the Philippines Department of Labour and Employment organised a conference of ministries of labour of Asian members of ASEM, in Manila. A number of trade unions from the region actively participated in the conference. Under the title “Substantiating the ASEM Dialogue on Social and Employment Issues”, the conference concluded by formulating key recommendations to be passed to the upcoming meeting of ASEM labour ministers in September 2006 in Germany.

62. The Potsdam Ministerial Meeting was held under the heading of “More and Better Jobs – Working Jointly to Strengthen the Social Dimension of Globalisation”. It offered a forum for plenary policy discussion and work in three thematically structured workshops:

• Growth and employment: how can positive interaction be enhanced?• Investment in human resources: key factor for economic progress and social inclusion• Regional cooperation: the best way to strengthen the social dimension of globalisation.

11

63. By calling for a social agenda to tackle the shortcoming of globalisation, ASEM Labour Ministers responded to one of the main demands of the international trade union movement. The full Conclusions of the Potsdam Ministerial are attached (Annex II). Ministers “underline the key role of full and productive employment, decent work for all and social cohesion for sustainable socio-economic development”. They further emphasised the need for “policy to respect and promote human and social rights, particularly those set out in the ILO decent work agenda and in the ILO 1998 Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work which cover the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour, the effective abolition of child labour, the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation, the freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right of collective bargaining.” Given the low rate of ratification of ILO core conventions in Asia, this Conclusion, signed by all Asian Labour Ministers, is worth noting.

64. The Conclusion on Burma was rather disappointing. The explicit reference to a smaller group of Ministers (“some ministers”) who agreed on the formulation of this Conclusion highlights the lack of consensus on the subject. Ministers limited themselves to “recall the conclusions on Myanmar adopted by the ILO Conference, reiterating the need for the Myanmar authorities to show action and follow-up on these conclusions.”

65. The Conclusions of the workshop on “Growth and Employment: how can positive interaction be enhanced? put decent work at the heart of employment and social policies. The reference to the need to “improve employment intensity of growth” reflects the ministers’ preoccupation about jobless economic growth which was substantially debated during the workshop. The involvement of the social partners is mentioned (“…should try to involved and mobilise all relevant stakeholders including the social partners”.), but the careful formulation contrasts with the central place given to decent work in the Conclusions. Further, the emphasis on companies’ “voluntary contributions” with no reference to the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and their follow-up mechanism is disappointing. On a positive note, the Conclusions did refer to the ILO Tripartite Declaration on Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy.

66. The Conclusions of the 2nd workshop on “Investment in human capital: key factor for economic progress and social inclusion” stressed the importance of responsible political leadership to put into practice an efficient monitoring system of labour markets in order to identify, cover and anticipate training needs. Particularly welcome is the focus on vulnerable groups including the low skilled, women, young, older and migrant workers. Ministers failed, however, to recognise that workers and their organisations have a capacity to enhance the quality of investment in human capital when they are involved in the design and implementation of training policies.

67. The Conclusions of the 3rd workshop on “Regional cooperation to strengthen the social dimension of globalisation” identified vocational training, migration issues and implementing decent work and occupational health and safety at work as possible topics for further ASEM cooperation. These choices are welcome although it is regrettable that the language on social partners’ involvement is so cautious (“further cooperation should try to involve the social partners and other relevant actors in an appropriate way”).

3rd ASEM Environment Ministers’ Meeting, Copenhagen, April 2007

68. In April 2007 in Copenhagen, the 3rd ASEM Environment Ministers’ Meeting adopted a Declaration text which provided a clearly stated agreement that progress should be made in order to promote an ambitious post-2012 climate change agreement under the Kyoto protocol. Furthermore, the ASEM countries underlined the need to ensure a substantive process to be concluded as early as possible to avoid a gap between the first and the second Kyoto commitment periods, increasing the chances for a good result at the UN Climate Conference of the Parties (COP 15) to be held in Copenhagen in 2009. Furthermore, the European and Asian countries agreed that decoupling of economic growth from emissions and energy consumption was not only necessary but certainly also possible. It was the first

12

time that the Environment Ministers of EU and Asia have reached agreement on an actual Declaration text under ASEM.

8th ASEM Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, Hamburg, Germany, May 2007

69. Ministers noted that all candidate countries to ASEM, i.e. the ASEAN Secretariat, Bulgaria, India, Mongolia, Pakistan and Romania, had completed their internal procedures and looked forward to their formal admission at the next ASEM-Summit on October 2008 in China.

70. The Meeting welcomed the outcome of the 12th ASEAN Summit in Cebu, Philippines in January 2007, in particular the Cebu Declaration on the Blueprint of the ASEAN Charter, as well as the Cebu Declaration on the Acceleration of the Establishment of an ASEAN Community by 2015.

71. Ministers reiterated previous recommendations on Burma, noted the agreement between Burma and the ILO in February 2007 to set up a mechanism to deal with complaints of forced labour and encouraged Burma to follow-up on that commitment. They called on the Government of Burma to remain constructively engaged with ASEAN and the United Nations as well as with the international community, international humanitarian organisations and NGO’s, to ensure the people of Burma benefit from assistance.

72. The Chairperson’s statement welcomed the manifestation of the social dimension of ASEM, initiated with the 1st ASEM Ministerial Meeting on Labour and Employment in Potsdam, Germany. The Meeting noted with satisfaction the upcoming 1st ASEM Ministerial Meeting on Education and Qualification in Germany, co-sponsored by China, in spring in 2008 and related activities such as the successfully sustained “life long learning initiative” by Denmark.

73. The Meeting further welcomed regional and international cooperation on labour and employment especially in areas of vocational training, lifelong learning, migration issues, the implementation of decent work and occupational health and safety at work.

74. The Meeting welcomed the European Commission’s intention to establish a facility to work with partners in advancing the dialogue in priority policy areas recognised by Leaders at ASEM 6 in Helsinki, such as economy and finance, environment, employment and social affairs, and promotion of cultural diversity and intercultural affairs. Such a dialogue facility would, to some extent, replace the ASEM Trust Fund (ATF) and should provide for some funding to facilitate meetings between the social partners in ASEM.

Senior Labour Officials Preparatory Meeting for the 2nd Labour Ministers Meeting, Yogyakarta, 12-13 September 2007

74. This meeting was attended by representative from 31 countries from Europe and Asia. The ILO attended as an observer. The representative of Indonesia supported by his colleagues called for substantial cooperation in the area of labour and employment. Senior Officials underlined the importance of involving stakeholders in the process of ASEM dialogue on labour and employment issues. The meeting also recalled the Potsdam and Helsinki call for the involvement of the social partners. The agenda focused on 3 topics namely training and employability, social protection and labour migration.

75. Concerning the first topic, discussions were held on the extension of education and training for youth and the promotion of full employment. Senior Officials agreed on the importance for ASEM partners to promote dialogue and cooperation on both initial and life-long-learning training to better address labour market changes and mismatches. It was suggested that ASEM should strengthen the role of the social partners in handling employment issues.

13

76. Concerning social protection, most representatives pointed to the need to extend social protection coverage and provide adequate protection in particular to workers in informal employment. It was also widely recognised that social security reform is key for promoting growth and employment and that national governments play a key role in implementing social protection systems together with other stakeholders. Finally the meeting urged ASEM leaders to deepen the dialogue on promoting the social responsibility of companies at the national and international level.

77. Concerning labour migration, issues such as the brain drain, demographic changes, the protection of migrant workers and labour market management were discussed. The need for a comprehensive approach to labour migration to maximize opportunity and minimize risk was highlighted.

78. The meeting discussed a number of cooperation projects to be considered for possible implementation under the ASEM process. Those included: social security for workers in the informal economy, labour market integration of migrant workers, capacity building in the field of vocational training, occupational health and safety, and the role of corporate social responsibility (CSR).

8th ASEM Finance Ministers’ Meeting Jeju Island, Korea, 14-17 June 2008

79. The meeting was attended by 16 Finance Ministers of Asian countries, 24 member states of the European Union, and the European Commissioner for Economic and Monetary Affairs. The President of the Asian Development Bank, the Vice President of the European Central Bank and the Deputy Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund were invited guests.

80. Ministers agreed that downside risks have emerged from the slowdown of the U.S. economy, tightened credit conditions in global financial markets, and mounting inflationary pressures mainly driven by high energy and food prices. They acknowledged that financial integration in Asia could bring more stability to the region and, in turn, would reduce uncertainty and foster economic growth.

81. Ministers welcomed the Jeju Initiative to enhance mutual cooperation on Public-Private Partnership (PPP) among ASEM countries. The mutual cooperation under the Jeju Initiative may include partnership programmes such as sharing information on PPP among member countries, operating education/training programmes, providing technical assistance, and exchanging experts in both regions. Ministers agreed to launch a task force to examine the details of the partnership and to hold an ASEM international conference on PPP.

82. With regards to climate change, ministers welcomed the adoption of the Bali Roadmap and reaffirmed the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities. They stated their determination to strengthen cooperation to promote the full, effective and sustained implementation of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Further they agreed to explore the role of market-oriented responses in mitigating greenhouse gas emissions cost effectively and with minimal impact to growth prospects. They took note of market-oriented policies as a means of working with the market to appropriately price greenhouse gas emissions changing the incentives for lower-carbon activities, whilst also acknowledging the potential for other policy levers.

5th Asian-Europe Parliamentary Partnership Meeting (ASEP), Beijing, June 18 – 20, 2008

83. Delegates noted global economic problems and agreed on tackling them through further cooperation. In particular they expressed concerned about rising global food prices, the impact on the life of the poor, and global poverty reduction objectives.

84. ASEP parliamentarians recommended that their countries, developed ones in particular, take measures to increase aid in the short term, promote sustainable development of agricultural production and improve agricultural productivity to raise food self-sufficiency and ensure food security. They noted the increasing importance of energy security and sustainable development and the need for international cooperation in this sector.

14

85. The delegates were concerned about the slow progress in multilateral trade negotiations, fluctuating international financial markets, and the constraints of climate change. They undertook to ask their governments to advance the Doha Round of negotiations to a comprehensive, balanced and early conclusion, preferably within the year. Dialogue and cooperation on financial policies, to jointly safeguard the stability of the regional financial market, were advocated. Delegates called on ASEM members to observe the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and make efforts to enable full, efficient and sustained implementation of the convention through long-term cooperation.

86. Delegates further urged developed countries to fulfil, as soon as possible, their commitment of increasing their Official Development Assistance (ODA) to 0.7 percent of their Gross National Income (GNI) for poverty reduction and development endeavours of developing countries.

1st ASEM Social Partners’ Forum, Brussels, June 30 – July 1, 2008

87. The European Commission hosted the first social partners’ forum in Brussels. About 150 workers’ and employers’ representatives from 43 countries in Europe and Asia attended. The theme was “How to make globalisation a success for all - the social partners’ contributions to the ASEM dialogue”.

88. The forum provided an opportunity for a first joint activity of Asian and European social partners in the context of the ASEM process. It offered a framework for social partners to get to know each other, to share information and best practices and to formulate suggestions concerning the implementation of the ASEM dialogue in the area of employment and social policy.

89. The forum also provided the opportunity to have more in depth discussion on three main issues: qualification, training and employability; employment creation and “flex-security”; poverty reduction, social protection and social cohesion; and working conditions and quality of work. While no conclusions were drawn, a summary of the discussions will be forwarded to the 2nd Labour and Employment Ministers’ Meeting.

90. During the social partners’ forum, all trade unionists insisted on the importance of social dialogue in building a social dimension to globalisation and asked for a formal social partners’ consultation within ASEM process. The European Commission was rather supportive of these proposals and committed itself to “try to arrange some consultation with the social partners prior to the Bali 2nd labour and employment ministers’ meeting”.

91. There was some consensus that the ASEM dialogue on employment issues should deliver some specific projects of cooperation. The government of France indicated that it may be interested by a project on decent work and the government of Singapore was reported to have some interest in the area of health and safety while the government of Germany seems to have identified the topic of CSR for further follow-up.

TRADE UNIONS IN THE ASEM PROCESS

From the Bangkok Summit 1996 to 1998

92. The ICFTU-APRO presented a Statement to the ASEM Bangkok Summit in 1996. In May 1997, the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES) held a Workshop for Asian and European trade unions in Bangkok on how to promote a dialogue between Asian and European trade unions around the framework of ASEM. It was agreed that ASEM was likely to develop increasingly in importance and impact on workers, and

15

that unions should therefore aim to establish their role in the process so as to ensure that their concerns were taken into account.

London Summit 1998

93. There was more of a union presence at the London Summit of ASEM. A union delegation met the UK Foreign Secretary on the eve of the Summit, and presented him with an ICFTU/ETUC/ICFTU-APRO Statement. The Statement pointed out that ASEM could be a force for recovery from the crisis, but that it must effect this recovery for the entire population of the region. The Statement recommended that in addition to regulations to ensure increased transparency and accountability in the financial sector, social policies and not just market-oriented policies were needed to address the social damage that was caused. It recommended that an employment recovery strategy be implemented to protect the millions of workers being laid off, and that at least 50% of the relief funding go to this and other social programmes.

94. The Foreign Secretary expressed his belief in the need for a broader discussion at ASEM, to include the social elements of the recovery strategy, and agreed that unions should be fully involved in such a strategy. He committed himself to convey the union views to the Leaders at the Summit, but the ensuing Chairman’s Statement and Financial Crisis Response statement did not reflect much of what was included in the union recommendations. The Chairman’s Statement does nothing more than mention employment briefly as a global issue that warranted further co-operation.

Seoul Summit 2000

95. An ICFTU/ICFTU-APRO Conference was held on 15-16 October 2000 in Seoul with the support of the FES, on the eve of the ASEM Seoul Summit. As well as affiliates from the two regions, the ETUC, TUAC and some GUFs attended the Conference. The Conference adopted an ICFTU/ETUC/ICFTU-APRO Statement, entitled Charting a Social Direction to ASEM. The Statement called on Leaders to advance a discussion on trade and labour standards within the WTO and provide a more highly regulated international financial system. It criticised an IPAP document extolling the absence of strikes as an effective measure to attract foreign direct investment, and urged for the integration of social standards into the IPAP. The Statement called for the inclusion of social and employment issues in the full agenda of ASEM, in particular by restructuring the ASEF to reflect a comprehensive social agenda, and reorienting the ATF towards more poverty alleviation and social projects. It further stressed that fundamental workers’ rights enshrined in the new ILO Declaration of 1998 should be respected. Finally, the Statement urged the establishment of a Social Pillar of ASEM and guarantee of regular consultations with trade unions.

96. A delegation met with the Minister of Labour of the Korean Government and asked him to make the trade union statement available to all ASEM Leaders attending the Seoul Summit. The delegation demanded the immediate release of all imprisoned trade unionists and Korea’s compliance with the obligations arising as a result of its membership of the ILO and the OECD, in particular the observance of core labour standards. However, the Minister did not give any significant response in the meeting.

97. While the Chairman’s statement at the Seoul Summit did not make direct reference to trade unions, it underscored the importance of enhancing mutual understanding between the two regions through closer people-to-people exchanges in “social” and cultural areas. It stressed the need to expand the work of ASEM to pertain to social safety nets and human resource development, including lifelong learning, particularly with a view to ensuring that “the benefits of globalisation are widely shared while reducing its adverse effects”.

Copenhagen Summit 2002

16

98. A preparatory trade union conference was held in Bonn, Germany on 7-8 March 2002, hosted by the FES and preceded by a public meeting where representatives of ASEM governments and NGOs joined trade unions in discussions on ASEM issues. The conference was attended by the ICFTU affiliates in ASEM countries as well as non-ICFTU affiliates from China, Indonesia and Vietnam. It discussed a draft ICFTU/ETUC/ICFTU-APRO Statement to the 4th ASEM Summit, as well as a draft joint statement of the ICFTU and an NGO group, the Asia Europe People’s Forum (AEPF).

99. With a view to strengthening the social dimension in the ASEM process, the ICFTU/ETUC/ICFTU-APRO Statement urged ASEM Leaders to establish taskforces and hold regular Labour and Social Ministers’ meetings to integrate social concerns, such as poverty reduction, the creation of decent work and social safety nets, throughout the ASEM work programme. The statement called on Leaders to endorse a formal consultative status for trade unions and set up a Social Forum as a consultative mechanism with trade unions and other civil society representatives.

100.As agreed by the Bonn conference, the ICFTU subsequently launched an ASEM trade union list-serve to facilitate ASEM-related information flows among trade unions in ASEM countries.

101.A Trade Union Conference was held in Copenhagen from 19-21 September 2002 on the eve of ASEM IV, hosted by LO, Denmark and attended by the ICFTU affiliates in ASEM countries as well as non-ICFTU affiliates from China, Indonesia and Vietnam. The conference started with an opening session where the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Per Stig Møller, expressed support for trade union recommendations including the establishment of a trade union consultative body within the ASEM process, and agreed to call for an ASEM Social and Labour Ministers’ meeting. The second day of the conference was held jointly with NGOs in the Asia Europe People's Forum, generating some mutual interest and cooperation.

102.The Trade Union Conference adopted a Trade Union Plan of Action towards the 5th ASEM Summit. Major points of decision included:

• Developing linkage with a German government initiative, which was developed as a direct result of trade union pressure, to build up a larger social work programme within ASEM;

• Building up knowledge of the ASEM Trust Fund (ATF) implemented by the World Bank, with a view to increasing the social content of projects;

• Developing various trade union initiatives to make the case for an ASEM labour advisory structure, for union participation in Asia Europe Foundation (ASEF) activities, and for strengthening social issues in the work of ASEM.

103.As the Danish Foreign Minister promised, the ICFTU/ETUC/ICFTU-APRO statement was distributed to member governments during the official Copenhagen Summit. The Chairman’s Statement did not directly refer to any of the trade union recommendations, but endorsed the German proposal on employment and labour as a result of trade union pressure. This later evolved into the idea of an ASEM Labour Ministers’ Meeting. The statement stressed that ASEM needed to promote cooperation in the social fields, as well as in educational and environmental fields.

Hanoi Summit 2004

104.An ICFTU/ETUC/ICFTU-APRO statement on ASEM V, “Creating a Social Partnership in ASEM” was adopted in February 2004. The ICFTU, ETUC and ICFTU-APRO requested ASEM affiliates to discuss trade union recommendations with their governments, ASEF governors and World Bank executive directors. The ETUC communicated the unions’ recommendations to the European Commission, in line with a Plan of Trade Union Action towards ASEM V.

105.In a meeting to discuss the trade union proposals, European Commission officials commented that:

17

• It would not be feasible to create a new body within the official ASEM structure, such as a Social Pillar or an ASEM Trade Union Forum. However, the Commission, as well as the ASEF would try to organise consultative meetings with civil society organisations and trade unions as often as possible;

• Social and labour issues would most probably be discussed under the Economic Pillar within the work of TFAP, IPAP or a new project that would be established in response to a recommendation of the Conference on employment and labour to take place in June 2004 in Berlin;

• The ASEF had been approached concerning the launch of a new project on labour relations, which could involve trade unions at the planning and implementing stages [It should however be noted that as of this date little or no progress had been made regarding this project];

• There was a proposal within the European Commission for corporate social responsibility and the promotion of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises to be taken up in the work of ASEM. However, owing to ongoing restructuring of the ASEM work programme concerning the Economic Pillar, little progress was made subsequently.

106.Following the FES-organised seminar on 22-23 April 2004 in Hanoi mentioned above, an Asia-Europe Trade Union Forum was held in Hanoi on 24 April 2004 with the participation of 30 international trade union representatives from 12 countries. The meeting was inaugurated by the President of the Vietnam General Confederation of Labour (VGCL), the host organisation of the Forum.

107.Following the trade union forum, a delegation of trade unionists from Asia and Europe met with the Vice Prime Minister of Vietnam, Mr. Vu Kho An. The delegation made further calls for ASEM to set up a permanent Asia-Europe Dialogue on employment and labour issues. It was further emphasised that ASEM had never responded to trade union demands for a work programme to tackle key issues including workplace consultation, decent work creation and social dialogue. It had yet to respond to the international labour movement on issues relating to occupational health and safety, environmentally sustainable workplaces, effective industrial relations, gender equality and migrant workers’ rights. The delegation also raised the issue of human rights in Burma during their meeting with the Vice Prime Minister, in light of Burma’s application to join ASEM.

108.The Vice-Prime Minister of Vietnam agreed that ASEM needed a new social pillar, and that economic growth and social development must progress hand-in-hand. He emphasised that poverty reduction and employment were two of the major items on the agenda for the ASEM V Summit and that Vietnam would give its strong support to the German initiative on employment and labour.

109.In the event, not much was said in the Hanoi Leaders’ statement with regard to the German proposal and indeed, the ASEM Leaders attached inadequate attention to the social dimension of ASEM as a whole. Employment and labour were referred to under two headings in the Chair’s Statement: under “Closer Economic Partnership”, as one of the areas which ASEM economic activities should promote, along with sustainable economic growth and the reduction of the development gap among ASEM partners; and under “Expanding and Strengthening Cooperation in Other Fields”, as one of the areas in which Leaders acknowledged the importance and potentials for Asia-Europe cooperation and agreed to further expand the cooperation, along with social development, education and training, public health and environment. There was no specific reference to the ASEM Employment Conference (Berlin, 1-2 June 2004). Leaders failed to indicate concrete measures to bring forward the ASEM employment and labour dialogue in either the Declaration on “Closer ASEM Economic Partnership” or “Dialogue among Cultures and Civilisations”, while on the other hand, they agreed to promote interaction with the business community and instructed their Senior Officials to study the applicability of the recommendations of the Asia-Europe Business Forum (AEBF).

Helsinki Summit 2006

18

110.The ICFTU/ETUC/WCL/ICFTU-APRO/BATU prepared a Statement “10 years of ASEM: Time to Deliver!” to provide both the 1st ASEM Labour Ministers Meeting and the Helsinki Summit with trade unions’ views on ASEM’s first decade and key recommendations for the future. In the statement, the full text of which is attached as Annex I, trade unions emphasised the need for ASEM to adopt a formal consultative status for trade unions, and to establish a permanent and constructive dialogue on social and employment issues. They called upon Leaders to set up and promote a pro-active decent work-based social agenda responsive to changes affecting both regions. They demanded the establishment of an ASEM cooperation framework to exchange information on decent work national plans aiming at achieving the interrelated objectives of full employment, higher job quality and increased labour productivity; asked for guidelines to enhance workers’ productivity and capacity to move from informal to formal and decent work and an ASEM work programme to ensure the full integration of young people into the labour market; and urged ASEM members to involve trade unions in their dialogue on labour flexibility and social protection.

111.A Trade Union Forum was organised in Helsinki on 7 and 8 September 2006 with representation of European and Asian Unions, the Finnish Minister of Labour, the ILO, the European Commission, the AEBF and the AEPF. Mrs Halonen, President of Finland, addressed the trade union forum. In her speech, Mrs Halonen, while noting that globalisation had created unfair competition especially on jobs, both in Asia and Europe, emphasised the need for fair multilateral rules and decent work to tackle poverty and promote growth. She deplored the fact that workers’ voice had not been much heard in this debate and said she would deliver the trade union message to the heads of state and government during their Summit.

112.The Trade Union Forum welcomed the Conclusions of the Employment and Labour Ministers Meeting in Potsdam. After 10 years of lobbying, the establishment of an ASEM dialogue on social and labour issues was greatly appreciated. The Trade Union Forum stated that the Potsdam Ministerial Conclusions related to decent work and workers’ rights were a step in the right direction. It emphasised that continued efforts were needed in order for trade unions to be granted a consultative status within the ASEM structure similar to that of the Asia-Europe Business Forum.

113.Trade unions’ proposals for further work included: • To continue to lobby both at the national and regional level for a formal trade union consultative

status;• To develop more and better coordinated trade union lobbying at the national level, especially with

European Governments, in order to call for the 2nd Labour Ministers Meeting in Indonesia to be tripartite and to include the ILO;

• To ensure trade unions’ involvement in the implementation of the Potsdam meeting;

• To develop a lobby strategy to have OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises put on the agenda of ASEM investment and trade dialogues;

• To develop tripartite activities or seminars including through the ASEF;

• To address the issue of contract or casual workers in Asia and in Europe.

Jakarta, Indonesia, 25-26 July 2007

114. Trade unions from Europe and Asia met in July 2007 in Jakarta just before the senior officials’ preparatory meeting for the 2nd Labour and Employment Ministers Conference. The meeting was opened by Indonesian trade unionists and the Secretary General of the Manpower Ministry. Trade unionists from Asia underlined the weakness of the social dialogue in the region and noted that ‘Social Asia’ was still far away.

115.Addressing the meeting, the EU Commission stressed that the partners in Potsdam agreed that the meeting there was only the start and that serious follow-up had to be ensured. It was recalled that the

19

Finnish government supported the call for trade unions’ formal consultation in the ASEM structure. The organisation of a 1st Social Partners Forum to be held in Brussels with the support of the European Commission was mentioned.

116. After a lively debate, the meeting adopted 10 recommendations for an ASEM social agenda that were presented to the ASEM senior officials. The trade unions statement and recommendations are in Annex II of this document.

Other ASEM Fora

117. Trade unions have been invited to provide their perspectives on ASEM on general or specific issues on several occasions, which include:

− ASEF seminar on labour relations (The Hague, October 1998)− States and Markets Seminar (Copenhagen, March 1999), hosted by the Danish government;− ASEM Trust Fund Conference in Oxford (September 2001)− ASEM Trust Fund Conference on social policies to cope with economic instability (Brussels,

December 2001)− ASEM Lifelong Learning Conference (Copenhagen, January 2002)− ASEM Consultative Forum (Brussels, 6-7 May 2002), organised by the FES in cooperation with the

European Commission− ASEM Human Rights Series – Working Group on Human Rights and Multi-National Companies

(Osaka, 21-22 September 2002)− ASEM Human Rights Series – Working Group on Foreign Direct Investment (Bangkok, 22-23

February 2003)− ASEM Human Rights Series - Fifth Informal Seminar (Lund, 15-16 May 2003)− ASEM Consultative Seminar with Civil Society (Brussels, 17-18 November 2003)− ASEM Informal Seminar on The future of employment in ASEM: The role of "Corporate Social

Responsibility" for the creation of decent jobs (Hanoi, 21 -23 April 2004)− ASEM Conference on Future of Employment and Labour, (Berlin, 1-2 June 2004) − ASEF Conference in partnership with Casa Asia (Spain), the International Institute for Asian Studies

(The Netherlands) and the Japan Center for International Exchange (JCIE): “Connecting Civil Society of Asia and Europe: An Informal Consultation” (Barcelona, 16-18 June 2004)

− ASEM Education and Research Hub for Life Long Learning – Conference (Copenhagen, Denmark, 1-4 May 2005)

− ASEM Meeting on the role of Youth in revitalising and substantiating the Asia-Europe partnership (Tianjin, China, November 2005)

− ASEM event “Strengthening Human Resources through Vocational Education Training” (Berlin, Germany, 13-14 February 2006)

− 7th Informal ASEM Seminar on Human Rights (Budapest, Hungary, 22-23 February 2006)− ASEF Forum “The World Economy for All” (Deauville, France, 10-11 March 2006)

THE AEPF, THE AEBF AND ASEF

Asia Europe People’s Forum (AEPF)

118. Outside the official ASEM process, an Asia Europe People’s Forum (AEPF) was organised on the occasion of every ASEM Summit from Bangkok in 1996 to Helsinki in 2006. An international organising committee of the AEPF has included NGOs in Asia such as the Focus on the Global South, Forum Asia, the Institute for Popular Democracy, and the People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, and in

20

Europe spearheaded by the Trans-national Institute in The Hague and the Asienhaus in Germany. Its main objectives are to:

• Make the ASEM process more transparent and accountable with mechanisms for civil society input and participation.

• Advance an integrative development within ASEM between economic cooperation, political dialogue and fostering of cultural and people's links in both regions.

• Address the cutting edge issues of poverty eradication, social injustice, human rights, gender equality, and the equity gap in people's lives within Asia and Europe and between both regions.

119. The international organising committee of the AEPF met in Berlin on 5-6 March 2002 and prepared a draft AEPF/ICFTU joint statement proposing the establishment of an ASEM Social Forum as a consultative body of trade unions and other civil society representatives. The statement was finalised after the Bonn meeting (7-8 March 2002) and further discussed in the Brussels consultative forum (6-7 May 2002) mentioned above. The proposal for an ASEM Social Forum has not been further discussed within the AEPF since the Copenhagen AEPF in September 2002.

120. The relationship of NGOs with ASEF (Asian Europe Foundation) has been problematic. Some NGOs have regarded ASEF as an insufficient representative of Euro-Asian civil societies, as it is a government-initiated project and functions under the guidelines of ASEM governments. Despite the criticism, many NGOs participate in ASEF organised activities.

121. ASEM has long being criticised (including by some European governments) for being a top-down process. The ASEM evaluation prepared in 2006 jointly by the Japan Centre for International Exchange and the University of Helsinki recommended that “Bottom-up initiatives such as the Asia Europe People’s Forum should be welcomed and harnessed”. However this feeling is not shared by all ASEM governments.

122. The AEPF 6 was held on September 3- 6 2006 in Helsinki, Finland. The AEPF 6 theme was “People's vision - Building solidarity across Asia and Europe”. Conferences and workshops were organised around three main focus areas: 'Peace and Security', 'Economic Security and Social Rights' and 'Democratisation and Human Rights'. A number of trade unionists participated in this Forum.

123. AEPF 7 with the theme “For Social and Ecological Justice!” will be held on 13-15 October 2008 in Beijing.

Asia-Europe Business Forum (AEBF)

124. The Asia-Europe Business Forum (AEBF) was one of the first initiatives launched at the inaugural ASEM (Asia-Europe Meeting) Summit in Bangkok, March 1996. Supported by ASEM Government agencies, leading business representatives from the 25 ASEM partner countries met to discuss trade and investment issues and propose recommendations that would enhance the attractiveness of the Asia-Europe marketplace. The AEBF is intended to strengthen economic cooperation between the business sectors of both regions and to provide an effective platform for high-level discussion and networking. To this date, they have met 9 times. The last meeting was in Helsinki and their next will be in China on 21-24 October 2008. The theme of the next forum will be 'Seize the Trend, Time for Action and Public-Private Partnership'. The AEBF does not have a secretariat.

The Asia-Europe Foundation (ASEF)

21

125. ASEF was launched by the ASEM Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in 1997 with the objective of promoting understanding between the peoples of Asia and Europe through intellectual, cultural and people-to-people exchange. ASEF's activities range over conventions, symposiums, seminars, public lectures, youth camps, art competitions, performances, exhibitions, and other promotions in these three areas. The secretariat is based in Singapore.

126. The decision making body of ASEF is the Board of Governors, consisting of 39 individuals (former MOFA officials, scholars, etc.) proposed by member governments but acting independently. The Board of Governors, which meets twice a year, sets out policy directions of ASEF.

127. ASEF is funded by voluntary contributions from the governments of ASEM countries and the European Commission. Many ASEF projects are supported financially by various partner institutions and private enterprises, including Ericsson, Lufthansa, the European Youth Forum, Raoul Wallenberg Institute, etc.

PARALLELS FOR ASEM IN THE INTERNATIONAL ARENA

128. In the attempt to articulate a union vision of ASEM as a more consultative and inclusive process, there are several parallels of use. The ILO is an example of a fully tripartite structure, where decisions are reached by consensus of three strong, representative, and independent groups. Through such a process, baseline standards can be set which have wide-ranging support.

129. The OECD is another model. Both the Trade Union Advisory Committee (TUAC) and the Business and Industry Advisory Committee (BIAC) provide information and analysis to the OECD Secretariat and as expert advice to outside requests, but they challenge the arguments of members of the OECD secretariat and member governments in a review process. Thus the OECD can assimilate both union and business viewpoints throughout the process of formulating policy advice for its members, and as a result, better advice is given.

130. The EU is another model of formal social dialogue, relevant not only because of its major role in ASEM, but because at the basis of the EU is the common market, which is a highly developed version of the free market goals of ASEM. The European example is proof that trade liberalisation and a commitment to social dialogue and workers’ rights – to ensure that they are able to participate in and contribute to the dialogue - do combine to produce economic growth and prosperity on a more equitable basis.

CONCLUSION

131. Although ASEM retains a pro-business orientation, the first meeting of ASEM labour and employment ministers in 2006 added an important element to the European-Asian dialogue: discussions of labour and employment in the context of the social dimension of globalisation. It provides a start in ensuring ASEM leaders recognise that globalisation in itself does not guarantee development, jobs and prosperity for all, but requires pro-active measures to be successful.

132. Building on the gains made over the last two years and ensuring the ASEM employment dialogue is improved upon and made permanent will require a strong trade union input. The October 2008 meeting provides a key moment for Asian and European trade union representatives to debate their practical strategies and actions needed in order to make the most effective possible input to the ASEM intergovernmental process.

22

************************

23

GLOSSARY

ACFTU All China Federation of Trade UnionsADB Asian Development BankAEBF Asia Europe Business ForumAECF Asia Europe Co-operation FrameworkAEVG Asia Europe Vision GroupAEPF Asia Europe People’s ForumASEAN Association of Southeast Asian NationsAPEC Asia Pacific Economic Co-operationAPRO Asian and Pacific Regional Organisation ASEF Asia-Europe Foundation ASEM Asia Europe MeetingATF ASEM Trust FundBIAC Business and Industry Advisory Committee (to the OECD)ETUC European Trade Union ConfederationEU European UnionFES Friedrich-Ebert-StiftungFTA Free Trade AgreementGDP Gross Domestic ProductGUF Global Union Federation ICFTU International Confederation of Free Trade UnionsIEG Investment Expert Group ILO International Labour OrganisationIMF International Monetary FundIPAP Investment Promotion Action Plan ITUC International Trade Union ConfederationITUC-APLN ITUC Asia Pacific Labour NetworkMDG Millennium Development GoalsMEMs Most Effective Measures (to attract foreign direct investment)OECD Organisation of Economic Cooperation and DevelopmentRTA Regional Trade AgreementSOM Senior Officials’ Meeting SOMTI Senior Officials’ Meeting on Trade and Investment TFAP Trade Facilitation Action Plan TUAC Trade Union Advisory Committee (to the OECD)WCL World Confederation of LabourWTO World Trade OrganisationWSSD World Summit on Sustainable Development

24

ANNEX 1

First ASEM Labour and Employment Ministers ConferenceChairman’s Conclusions

1. Under the title "More and Better Jobs – Working Jointly to Strengthen the Social Dimension of Globalisation" the first ASEM Labour and Employment Ministers' Conference was held in Potsdam, Germany, on 3-5 September, 2006. It was attended by the Labour and Employment Ministers from the ASEM Member Countries and by the Commissioner for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunity of the European Commission. The meeting was chaired by German Vice Chancellor and Minister of Labour and Social Affairs, Franz Müntefering.

Globalisation and employment – common challenges and opportunities

2. German Vice Chancellor Franz Müntefering opened the meeting and emphasised the important role of the ASEM process as a platform for the dialogue and cooperation between Asia and Europe. He welcomed this first opportunity for Labour and Employment Ministers to contribute to the ASEM process in response notably to the mandate by the 2004 Hanoi ASEM5 Summit to expand cooperation in areas of common interest such as employment, as well as to address strategic and longer-term political dimensions of major economic policy issues such as globalisation and its related social challenges.

3. He pointed out that globalisation, international division of labour and the need for restructuring have strongly affected both Asia and Europe and increased the interdependencies between these two regions. Even though there have been different developments regarding employment and investment policies, both regions are facing common challenges. This conference in the year of the 10th anniversary of the ASEM process reveals the importance of exchanging views, experiences and political strategies of shaping globalisation and maximizing its benefits. Vice Chancellor Müntefering further stressed the important role the Labour and Employment Ministers Meeting would have for the upcomingsummit in Finland. 4. Ministers congratulated Vice Chancellor Franz Müntefering for having taken this important initiative and underlined the importance of a close and productive dialogue and cooperation between Asia and Europe on employment and social policy. They recalled the increasing importance of Asia-EU relations, including a growing number of dialogues and cooperation initiatives between the EU and Asian countries. Ministers further underlined the key role of full and productive employment, decent work for all, and social cohesion for sustainable socioeconomic development, as recognised notably in the 2005 UN Summit conclusions. In this context Ministers also welcomed the report of the World Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalisation. European representatives stressed the EU’s increasing activity to include employment, decent work and regional and social cohesion into its external policies, including development, trade and external cooperation.

5. Ministers further discussed opportunities and challenges related to globalisation, the international division of labour and restructuring and prospects and appropriate policy responses with the objective to jointly maximise the benefits of globalisation and extend its benefits to all. While they noted the importance of making globalisation a success for all, they also acknowledged the need to resist protectionist approaches. Achieving both objectives requires good governance, effective social protection and effective policies to address the challenges posed by adjustment costs, to mitigate economic and social imbalances both within and among countries, to promote access to decent work for all, including for women and young people and to seize the opportunities provided by globalisation. It also requires policies to respect and promote human and social rights, particularly those set out in the ILO Decent Work agenda and in the ILO 1998 Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, which cover the

25

elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour, the effective abolition of child labour, the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation, the freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right of collective bargaining.

6. Key policies in this respect are effective education, employment and social policies, providing adequate systems of social protection, supporting the anticipation and management of change, promoting full and productive employment and decent work for all, investing more and more efficiently in human capital and strengthening regional cooperation and global governance. Ministers shared the view that such polices should include a certain number of common features valid across all countries, irrespective of their level of income, notwithstanding important differences in immediate priority areas for action and practical details.

7. Some Ministers referred to the 95th International Labour Conference held in Geneva where the case of Myanmar and the Forced Labour Convention 1930 (No. 29) was discussed. They recalled the conclusions on Myanmar adopted by this conference, reiterating the need for the Myanmar authorities to show action and follow-up on these conclusions. The representative of Myanmar briefed the Ministers about recent developments in Myanmar and mentioned that Myanmar would report to the next session of the Governing Body of the ILO in November.

Working jointly to strengthen the social dimension of globalisation8. Ministers welcomed the exchange of best practices regarding labour market and employment policies and social protection in the ASEM context. They addressed concrete ways to strengthen the social dimension of globalization and promote decent work for all in three separate workshop sessions:

I. Growth and employment – how can positive interaction be enhanced?9. Irrespective of their historical, political and development background, ministers of ASEM countries agreed that economic, employment and social policies are mutually reinforcing and should be coherent. In particular, they stressed that high and sustainable economic growth and sound economic framework conditions are the key for the creation of more and better jobs. They underlined that migration is a major element of globalisation which can be an important factor for economic growth and employment and called for an effective management of migration processes.

10. Employment and social policies should promote sustainable employment creation, more and better jobs and more productive employment, improve employment intensity of growth, provide security as well as flexibility in the labour market and in employment, strengthen employability and adaptability and promote employment creation in the formal sector. They should promote decent work for all, support gender equality, improve the quality of jobs and occupational health and safety in the workplace and provide employment opportunities for vulnerable and disadvantaged people. They should involve and mobilize all relevant stakeholders, including the social partners. Decent work is the key to sustainable productivity growth and vice versa. The demographic change highlights the central importance of sustainable productivity growth and decent work in achieving higher economic growth and better employment. Technological development, investments in R&D and human capital, occupational and regional mobility of labour through active labour market policies and the quality and attractiveness of working life are the cornerstones of sustainable productivity growth and higher employment.

11. Ministers agreed that enterprises can bring substantial benefits to sustainable economic growth, social welfare, and the creation of decent work. These positive and voluntary contributions can be strengthened when Corporate Social Responsibility is part of the core business of each company. With regard to Corporate Social Responsibility governments should facilitate and stimulate this process, taking the role of an agent for change, bringing different parties together and inviting them to engage in innovative cooperation. In this context Ministers underlined the importance of the ILO Tripartite Declaration of Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and the UN Global Compact.

II. Investment in human capital – key factor for economic progress and social inclusion

26

12. Ministers stressed the importance of education, training policies and competencies in view of increasing labour mobility and integration of immigrants. Lifelong learning improves employees’ security and readiness to adapt to the changes caused by restructuring and unemployment. Responsible political leadership calls for collection of labour market and education data, monitoring of the progress made, collecting best practices, setting up benchmarks on a national and international basis and anticipating the key competencies needed in the future. Increasing productivity, labour market participation, social inclusion and competitiveness requires quality education and training systems.

13. Lifelong learning has an important role in the future, particularly for young people, women and people over 50. Learning in schools and vocational training institutions has to become more attractive and demand-led, as school drop-outs and low-skilled workers will otherwise remain a continuous challenge to social security systems. Comprehensive systems of guidance, counselling and placement services need to be further developed. Recognition of non-formal learning and training certificates among regions will add to employment security and re-integration in the labour market.

14. Education and training policies should reduce school drop-outs, promote self independence of the youth, favour labour market-oriented vocational training and promote lifelong learning. They should provide competencies for the knowledge-society to develop domestic human resources that are competitive in the globalised economy.

III. Regional cooperation to strengthen the social dimension of globalization

15. Ministers agreed that regional cooperation is a good way to strengthen the social dimension of globalisation. Ministers are aware that despite the different levels of development of the ASEM countries, social imbalances may exist everywhere and may be aggravated by globalisation. Therefore, they reiterated the need for fair globalisation.

16. Strengthening the social dimension of globalisation requires international cooperation and exchange of experience, policy concepts and best practices. Ministers insisted on reinforcing regional cooperation which could offer a good basis for interregional dialogue as became evident in this conference. Topics of further ASEM cooperation could be: vocational training and lifelong learning, migration issues, implementing decent work and occupational health and safety at work.

17. Further cooperation should also try to involve the social partners and other relevant actors in an appropriate way.

Future cooperation and meetings

18. Ministers agreed to cooperate in the relevant international fora, including in the UN and notably the ILO, the WTO and the World Bank / Bretton Woods institutions, with a view to improving coherence on purpose of strengthening the social dimension of globalisation and meeting the related challenges. They took note of the need for ASEM in the future to further strengthen the substantive dialogue and cooperation in a number of areas, including employment and social policy.

19. They expressed their wish to have the results of this meeting reported to the ASEM 6 Summit in Finland. They called upon the summit to endorse their proposal of a regular ASEM dialogue and cooperation on employment and social policy, including seminars with specific topics of mutual interests which have to be decided upon. Ministers agreed to accept the kind offer of Indonesia to host the second ASEM Labour and Employment Minister Conference in 2008. Ministers expressed their appreciation to the German authorities for their excellent arrangement of the meeting and the warm hospitality offered by the Land of Brandenburg and the people of Potsdam.

27

ANNEX II

ASIA­EUROPE MEETING 

TRADE UNION STATEMENT FOR THESENIOR LABOUR OFFICIALS’ MEETING, YOGYAKARTA, 12­13 SEPTEMBER 2007 

Trade Union Recommendations for an ASEM social agenda

1. Adopt a formal consultative status for trade unions comparable with the arrangements made

available to the Asia Europe Business Forum ;

2. Establish an ASEM cooperation framework to exchange views on, promote and strengthen

national decent work plans with full participation of the social partners ;

3. Organise an ASEM tripartite conference (Labour Ministries and Workers and Employers’

representative organisations) to define common strategies on employability and life long

learning ;

4. Coordinate international support for the design and implementation of systems for universal

coverage of social security, with full use of the ILO’s expertise on issues related to social

protection ;

5. Exchange best practices on how to adapt national law and regulations concerning the

employment relationship, on the basis of implementing the 2006 ILO Recommendation on

the employment relationship (No 198) to adequately respond to emerging patterns in the

world of work ;

6. Develop a rights-based approach for managing migration within ASEM countries, facilitate

information sharing between receiving and sending countries and establish concrete

cooperation mechanisms, including on the portability of social security rights across ASEM

countries ;

7. Use ASEM as a platform to promote and exchange information on labour inspectorates in

line with the ILO Labour Inspection Convention (No 81) ;

8. Ensure that the IPAP (Investment Promotion Action Plan) focuses on those investments that

effectively contribute to the creation of decent work, including by establishing a formal

mechanism to promote and monitor the observance of internationally recognised social

principles such as the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and the ILO Tripartite

Declaration on Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy ;

9. Promote the ratification and full application of ILO fundamental workers’ rights

Conventions with the active participation of social partners and the ILO, and ensure that all

bilateral trade relations between ASEM countries refer to the respect of fundamental

workers’ rights ;

10. Build all possible political and economic pressure to force the government of Burma to

respect fundamental human rights including freedom of association and the elimination of

forced labour.

Introduction: Implementing the conclusions of the 1st Labour and Employment Minister Conference through an ASEM social agenda

Trade unions welcome the conclusions of the Helsinki 6th ASEM Summit which emphasised the need for a social dimension to be added to the ASEM process. ASEM Leaders agreed that effective policies need to be implemented at all levels in order to address the challenges posed by adjustment to globalisation. Trade unions support this view and call upon ASEM governments to exercise more active governance to ensure that the benefits of globalisation are shared more equitably with workers in both developed and developing countries.

We further support the Conclusions of the first Labour and Employment Ministers Conference (Potsdam, September 2006), in particular the recognition that appropriate policy responses towards achieving decent work for all, social cohesion and the enforcement of workers’ rights are all key elements to maximise the benefits of globalisation and extend its benefits to all.

Since the creation of ASEM in 1996, trade unions have been calling for social and employment issues to be given the attention they deserve. We are gratified that Ministers have now agreed to a regular ASEM dialogue and cooperation on employment and social policy. The political orientation given by ASEM Leaders and Labour Ministers in Helsinki and Potsdam needs to be translated into a meaningful social agenda. Trade unions believe that the ILO should be fully included in this process and recommend that the ILO Director General takes part in the coming meeting of Labour Ministers in Indonesia. Trade unions are willing to contribute to this process and this Declaration elaborates trade unions’ ten recommendations for the setting of an ASEM social agenda.

1. Granting trade unions a consultative status within the ASEM structure to enhance the quality of the dialogue

In Helsinki, Leaders highlighted the “need to sustain substantive ASEM dialogue and cooperation in this field [labour and employment], including with social partners2.”

The involvement of workers’ and employers’ organisations is indispensable if ASEM is to deal successfully with social and employment issues. Yet the ASEM structure remains unbalanced. Since the London Summit nine years ago, trade unions from Europe and Asia have urged ASEM members to endorse a trade union consultative mechanism that would provide a counterweight to the Asia Europe Business Forum (AEBF). As of this date ASEM has failed to achieve legitimacy with working people, notwithstanding the fact that workers have contributed the most to the economic growth of both regions and have been the most affected by adverse changes. Granting trade unions an official consultative status would also bring substantial knowledge on and experience of the challenges that ASEM is dealing with in relation to labour.

Just as the AEBF enjoys the privilege of a dialogue with all ASEM Leaders, so should their trade union counterparts be granted similar rights. It is therefore a matter of urgency for ASEM Leaders to adopt practical measures so as to give trade unions a formal consultative status comparable with the arrangements made available to the AEBF. Such status should be granted

2 Chairman's Statement of the Sixth Asia Europe Meeting Helsinki, 10­11 September 2006

29

through a forum, which would include all representative trade union centres in the ASEM region.

2. Establishing an ASEM cooperation framework to exchange views on, promote and

strengthen national decent work plans with full participation of the social partners

Most ASEM countries would agree that the economic growth of the last decades has failed to meet expectations for job creation. Today an estimated 500 millions Asians are either unemployed or underemployed, and Asian labour markets will have to deal with 245 million newcomers by 2015. In Europe, unemployment remains a structural problem which poses an extra burden on EU welfare systems already contending with the financing of an ageing population. An extremely preoccupying feature is the high level of unemployment among young people of both regions, with young people in Europe generally two times as likely to be unemployed as adults, and young people in many Asian countries up to 4 times as likely to be unemployed as other adults. Furthermore, the majority of jobs available to youth are generally low paid and insecure with few benefits or prospects for advancement. Indeed, where youth employment is addressed it is often in ways that make young people appear as second class citizens when it comes to rights at work. Women’s employment situation also remains far inferior to that of men in both Asia and Europe. This manifests itself in continuous lower pay for women for work of equal value, the inferior career prospects that many women have, and the general concentration of women in low-paying, indecent jobs.

In this context, the impact of globalisation on employment, labour markets and wages has become a key factor accounting for rising inequality. If globalisation has created jobs in certain regions and countries, it has also contributed to a process of downsizing industries, triggering increasing layoffs and involuntary displacement from permanent jobs. Globalisation has had an impact on job quality. The increased flexibility of global labour markets characterised by a growing number of atypical forms of employment has put millions of workers in a precarious and insecure work situation.

Achieving the objective of decent work for all requires an integrated approach based on four pillars which mutually reinforce each other, namely full and productive employment, respect for workers’ rights, access to universal social protection and facilitation of social dialogue as a way to promote consensus building.

In order to ensure that the benefits of growth are spread broadly and workers get a fair share, ASEM Labour and Employment Ministers should be guided by the ILO decent work agenda. It is indeed crucial that ASEM serve as a mechanism for information sharing on country specific experiences to attain common decent work goals. At the national level ASEM governments should implement decent work action plans as some members already have. At the ASEM level, a cooperation framework should be established for the promotion of decent work, particularly aimed at youth and women, among members with full participation of the social partners. Such a framework should also address how social dialogue can be strengthened in the many ASEM countries where this still remains a weak concept rather than a practical reality.

3. Stepping up employability and life long learning measures to enable workers’ move to better work opportunities and to enhance social cohesion

In today’s world full employment depends upon high quality labour, and investment in human capital is therefore crucial. Yet there are still large numbers of workers trapped in precarious low-skilled and low-paid jobs, unable to grasp better work opportunities and improve their living conditions. Among this group, women are overrepresented. It is important that low skilled workers are not excluded from employability measures and that life long learning schemes should not be the privilege of high-skilled workers.

30

Increasing workers’ employability through life long learning schemes is an effective response to the challenges posed by globalisation provided it is based on a solid tripartite social dialogue. It is the joint responsibility of public authorities, workers’ and employers’ organisations to make employability measures a success.

State and local authorities hold the overall responsibility to provide adequate training and retraining programmes for all, including women, the unemployed, those seeking to enter or re-enter the labour market and people with special needs. They must foster learning opportunities with the ultimate goal of reducing and preventing unemployment and increasing social cohesion. They must pursue policies that strengthen equal opportunities and close gender gaps and other forms of discrimination in education, training and employment.

Workers and their organisations, through their insights and experience, are key actors in identifying training needs and ensuring the success of training programmes. Trade unions need to have rights that enable them to provide guidance to workers on these issues and ensure that life-long learning remains an item for in depth social dialogue at the national, sectoral and company levels.

Employers must make the development of its employees’ abilities and skills crucial for the success of their company and refrain from transferring risks and costs to their employees. Human resources and production strategies based on low-cost approaches offer scant opportunity to upgrade labour productivity and business competitiveness. The business sector must invest more resources in education and training programmes from which it directly benefits.

A tripartite conference of ASEM Labour Ministries, workers’ and employers’ organisations should be organised at the earliest possible opportunity to discuss and define common strategies on employability and life long learning.

4. Achieving universal social protection to effectively fight poverty and inequality

Making globalisation a success for all requires social policy to work in tandem with economic policy. Growth oriented strategies based upon the so-called Washington Consensus are not credible to reduce inequality. ASEM governments must ensure that all workers including the most vulnerable, such as rural and migrant workers, atypical, informal and unprotected workers, are covered by social protection schemes.

Social protection must not be kept as a residual category in government policy. Instead, it is urgent to put the objective of universality of coverage at the heart of economic and structural policies in all ASEM countries. Three major elements sustain trade unions’ call for universal coverage. Firstly, it is urgent to tackle the rise in unprotected jobs resulting from the trend toward the casualisation and informalisation of labour markets. Universal coverage ensures that basic safety nets are available to all workers, irrespective of their status on the labour market. Secondly, experiences in low and medium income countries have proven that universal coverage is an effective instrument to alleviate poverty. Thirdly, universal coverage in social protection contributes to greater policy coherence between social and macro economic policies.

Universality of access to formal systems of social protection is more likely to become a reality if implemented through a universal, tax-financed (basic) social security system for which the state provides the regulatory framework and holds the ultimate responsibility. Contributory schemes’ objectives must remain to complement and not replace universal basic coverage. In relation to this, it is relevant to look at the present tax system in many ASEM countries, as many of these have recently developed along regressive lines, with the wealthy and high profit making business contributing less and less.

To succeed, reforms of social protection systems must rely on nationwide consensus and must be negotiated with the trade unions. Blanket prescriptions should be avoided as there is no one system of social protection applicable to all countries. ASEM can play an important role by coordinating international support for the design and implementation of democratically agreed concepts of social security. ASEM should ensure that full use is made of ILO expertise on social security

31

both in ASEM policy debate and in the technical cooperation made available to ASEM countries.

5. Strengthening legislation on the employment relationship to make sure workers are granted adequate protection

Recent statistics show that a substantial part of new jobs created have been in informal, unrecognised and unprotected work, with particularly workers in the so-called informal economy, in which the majority of Asian workers toil, facing a series of serious problems.. In both Asian and European regions, there is a growing pattern of ultra-flexible employment. Both the rise and the diversity of new forms of employment leave workers with increased uncertainty regarding their employment status. As a result, they are often left outside the scope of the protection normally associated with an employment relationship. A significant number of workers in informal employment relationships, (sub) contracted workers, agency workers or self-employed are abusively deprived from the rights, protection and security they are due. Last but not least, there are serious gender concerns associated with atypical workers.

In order to cope with the rapid evolution of labour markets in both Europe and Asia, it is crucial that ASEM governments regularly clarify and adapt the scope of their laws and regulations so as to make sure that those workers performing their activities in the context of an employment relationship are duly protected. The adoption of clear and relevant criteria, indicators, means and instruments in national legislation is crucial in order to help distinguishing self employed from dependent workers. Social partners have to be closely associated in this process.

To redress the unequal bargaining position between the two parties to an employment relationship (i.e. the employer and the workers), trade unions’ experience points to the importance of introducing a legal presumption concerning the existence of an employment relationship in national legislation.

The ILO Recommendation on the Employment Relationship (No 198) adopted by the 2006 International Labour Conference contains a number of instruments and suggestions particularly relevant to help government in these tasks. ASEM governments should review, adapt and exchange information on their legislation concerning the employment relationship along the lines of this ILO instrument.

6. PROTECTING AND PROMOTING THE RIGHTS OF MIGRANT WORKERS TO PREVENT ABUSES

In the era of globalisation, the number of people crossing borders to work, live or unite with their families abroad has reached an unprecedented level. Labour migration has brought about new risks and opportunities for both receiving and sending countries, requiring an appropriate policy framework to respond adequately to the situation. Women are often the particular victims of this situation, frequently trapped in situations of abuse as in the case of many of the women engaged as domestic workers.

At the international level, efforts should be directed to developing a rights-based approach for managing migration. ASEM should serve as a platform to facilitate the exchange of information between receiving and sending countries and to elaborate concrete cooperation mechanisms so as to enhance the positive effects of migration and mitigate the negative ones. Participation of trade unions and migrant workers’ organisations in this process is indispensable.

It is striking to note that few ASEM governments have ratified either the UN International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families3 or the relevant ILO Conventions Nos. 974 and 1435. Trade unions are ready to contribute to governments’ initiatives in this area, whether at the national, bilateral, regional or global level.

3 The Convention, adopted by the UN General Assembly resolution 45/158 of 18 December 1990, only came into force  on  1  July  2003  after   ratification  by  a  20th  country.   It  has  been ratified  by   the  Philippines  alone  among ASEM countries, while Cambodia and Indonesia have signed it.

32

ASEM governments must include the protection of migrants’ rights in the ASEM work programme and develop the necessary measures to protect migrant workers and their families from any form of discrimination, exploitation and maltreatment, including human trafficking on the basis of the principles enshrined in these Conventions. In relation to remuneration, it must be ensured that migrant workers receive the same wages as other workers performing similar work in the same national or local context. ASEM should also serve as a platform to discuss the portability of social security rights among its members.

7. Strengthening labour inspection to enhance law enforcement

Labour inspection is essential to facilitate the implementation of decent work including the enforcement of labour law and social protection rights. Labour inspection is central to tackling the problems related to workers’ health and safety, and to millions of children of school-age working under disastrous and inhumane conditions.

Those ASEM governments that have not yet ratified the ILO Labour Inspection Convention (No. 81) should do so. This priority Convention within the ILO is a key instrument to ensure respect for the protection of workers in the exercise of their duties. ASEM should serve as a vehicle to promote and exchange information between labour inspectorates from Asia and Europe.

8. Ensuring respect of fundamental workers’ rights by multinational enterprises

The processes of globalisation require that ASEM governments upgrade their regulatory role and to ensure better economic governance at global level. Full and productive employment should be put at the top of ASEM economic, industry and finance Ministers’ agendas. Indeed, achieving sustained growth of decent work requires an enabling macroeconomic framework responsive to labour market realities, shifting policy approaches from market-oriented structural reforms to employment-centred policies. It requires strong systems of collective bargaining, based on social dialogue involving government, trade unions and employers.

ASEM governments should cooperate in creating an atmosphere whereby employers in all economic activities, including those in Export Processing Zones (where 90% of the workers are women), fully recognise trade unions and respect the right to collective bargaining, in order to ensure that profits of industries and enterprises are reflected properly in wages and working conditions, and to arrest and reverse the “social” race-to-the-bottom. Where National Contact Points for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises exist, these should be strengthened and more education on the Guidelines themselves should generally be promoted.

The ASEM Trade Facilitation Action Plan (TFAP) and its Investment Promotion Action Plan (IPAP) must aim at developing a model of globalisation that works for the people, rather than merely seeking to increase trade and investment through business-driven regulatory reforms which may result in a lowering of social standards. The IPAP6 needs to be rewritten so as to incorporate broader social concerns, with reference to the ILO Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.

9. Ensuring respect for fundamental workers’ rights to avoid social dumping

4 Migration for Employment Convention (Revised), 1949 (No.      97) has been  ratified by Belgium, France, Germany,     Italy, Malaysia Sabah, Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain and the United Kingdom among ASEM countries.5 Migrant Workers (Supplementary Provisions) Convention, 1975 (No.      143) ,has been  ratified by Italy, Philippines     Portugal, Slovenia and Sweden among ASEM countries.

6 As part of the work of IPAP, in 1999 ASEM produced a list of Most Effective Measures (MEM) contributing to inward  investment flows, which included the absence of strikes as an effective investment incentive.

33

Trade unions welcome the Chairperson’s conclusions of the first Labour and Employment Ministers Conference which explicitly refers to core labour standards. Leaders agreed that to make globalisation a success for all, “It also requires policies to respect and promote human and social rights, particularly those set out in the ILO Decent Work agenda and in the ILO 1998 Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, which cover the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour, the effective abolition of child labour, the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation, the freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right of collective bargaining.”

Yet, these Conventions still remain un-ratified by several ASEM countries (see Table 1). An ASEM initiative should be taken at the ASEM and national levels to promote ratification and full application of fundamental workers’ rights, in cooperation with the ILO and with the active participation of social partners. Further work should also be initiated to ensure ratification and implementation of other ILO Conventions.

TABLE 1: Ratifications of the ILO Fundamental Conventions by ASEM Governments (as of 21 July 2007) (showing only those governments that have not ratified all 8 core conventions)

Forced Labour

Freedom of Association Discrimination Child

Labour

C 29 C 105

C 87 C 98 C 100 C 111 C 138

C 182

Brunei Darussalam*Burma R RChina (PRC) R R R RJapan R R R R R RRepublic of Korea R R R RLaos R R RMalaysia R D R R R RSingapore R D R R R RThailand R R R R RVietnam R R R R R

R – ratified; D – denounced.* Brunei Darussalam become an ILO member state in 2007.

Nevertheless, even when governments have ratified these ILO Conventions, fundamental workers’ rights may still be violated in a race to increase trade and investment. In today’s economy, those developing countries pursuing a model of export-led growth that violates workers’ rights have increased competitive pressures on markets worldwide and undermined labour standards in many other developing countries. Trade unions are deeply concerned about the export orientation of growth which is based upon the suppression of workers’ core rights, all in order to obtain labour-cost advantage.

It is therefore of utmost importance that all bilateral and sub-regional trade agreements between ASEM partners incorporate a strong social dimension, including a reference to fundamental workers’ rights, and rules for their effective implementation.

10. Ending forced labour in Burma to stop the oppression of the Burmese population

Forced and slave labour is unacceptable anywhere in the world. Yet in one ASEM member country – Burma – the use of widespread forced labour was the subject in 1995-1998 of an International Labour Organisation (ILO) special Commission of Inquiry concerning massive violations by the Burmese authorities of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (ILO Convention n° 29). The Burmese junta’s continuous refusal to implement the recommendations of the ILO

34

Commission of Inquiry let the ILO Conference to adopt a special Resolution in June 2000. That resolution is still in force. It calls, amongst other things, on all ILO Constituents (Governments, Employers’ and Workers’ Organisations) , as well as all intergovernmental organisations and agencies, including international financial institutions, to review any relations they may have with Burma and cease any such relations which may have the direct or indirect effect of perpetuating the use of forced labour in Burma.

In this context, trade unions condemn the decision taken by the 5th ASEM Summit to admit Burma (Myanmar) as a member of ASEM despite the massive and continued human rights violations taking place in that country. Trade unions note that the ILO’s scrutiny of forced labour in Burma is still in process, with several important recent developments. In particular, they note that the ILO Governing Body in March 2007 noted the signing of a Supplementary Understanding between the Burma Government and the ILO, aiming at securing the rights and personal safety of forced labour victims seeking redress from the authorities and at strengthening the role and effectiveness of the ILO’s presence in the country. Trade unions welcome in that respect the appointment of a senior ILO official as the new ILO Liaison Officer as well as the strengthening of the Liaison Office. At the same time, trade unions note that the issue of a possible referral of the Burmese authorities by the ILO to the International Court of Justice is still pending before the ILO Governing Body, which may activate that procedure at the appropriate time.

Trade unions welcome the increased attention devoted amongst ASEM countries to the situation of human and workers’ rights in Burma. Recalling the 1997 suspension of Burma’s export benefits under the EU Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) and the various elements of the EU Common Position on Burma, including restrictions on arms sales and travel to the EU by members of the junta, they call on the European Union to take strong additional measures in order to effectively force Burma’s military leaders to abide by its obligations under international human rights and labour law. Such measures should include the banning of business relations between EU-based companies and companies controlled by Burma’s military rulers or their proxies in key hard-currency earning sectors, particularly in the oil, gas, timber and mining industries, including gems. Any meaningful improvement in the EU Common Position should also include a ban on new investments in Burma by EU-based companies.

Trade unions salute the efforts of the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus (AIPMC) to exert regional peer pressure on Burma’s authorities with a view to securing democratisation and respect for fundamental rights in the country. They note with interest and welcome plans to establish a similar mechanism in the SAARC region, as well as the first international conference on Burma held jointly last May in Tokyo by AIPMC and a similar structure established by a bipartisan coalition of Japanese Diet Members (Minshuka Giren).

Despite international demands in countless fora, including by ASEM Leaders, the junta has shown no real willingness to put an end to its practices. ASEM governments must build all possible political and economic pressure to force the government of Burma to respect fundamental human rights including freedom of association and the elimination of forced labour. They should strongly support all efforts aimed at the above within the international community, at international and/or regional level, including by taking or supporting relevant action in the UN Security Council, the ILO and the International Court of Justice.

35

ANNEX III

Chairman’s Summaryof the Preparatory Meeting for

the 2nd ASEM Labour and Employment Ministers’ ConferenceYogyakarta, 12 – 13 September 2007

Introduction

1. The Preparatory Meeting for the 2nd ASEM Labour and EmploymentMinisters’ Conference was held in Yogyakarta on 12 – 13 September 2007.The purpose of the meeting was to prepare the convening of the upcoming2nd Labour and Employment Ministers’ Conference which will be held inBali in 2008. The meeting was chaired by the Director General of DomesticEmployment, Placement and Development of the Ministry of Manpowerand Transmigration of the Republic of Indonesia. 31 ASEM partners fromAsia and Europe attended the meeting. ILO representative also attendedthe meeting as observer.

2. The Director General of Domestic Employment Placement Development ofthe Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration provided the report of theorganizing committee of the meeting. Following the report, DirectorGeneral of America and Europe of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of theRepublic of Indonesia as the Indonesian ASEM SOM Leader alsowelcomed the delegates and expressed his wish that the meeting wouldprovide concrete recommendations for the Bali Conference. Took part inthe welcoming ceremony, Ambassador of Portugal, representing the EUPresidency expressed the EU’s commitment to making the BaliConference a success. Minister of Manpower and Transmigration of theRepublic of Indonesia in his keynote speech which was delivered by theSecretary General stressed the need for ASEM to embark on substantialcooperation in the area of labour and employment, and thus wished for thePreparatory Meeting to come up with valuable contributions.

3. The Meeting adopted the Provisional Agenda of the preparatory meeting.As agreed, the Agenda focused on three topics of discussion: training andemployability, social protection, and labour migration.

Training and Employability

4. The discussion on training and employability was chaired by Slovenia.Presentations were made by representatives from Indonesia, Slovenia,and Portugal. Delegates discussed the issue in length and stressed oneducation and training for youth and how to promote in ASEM memberstoward achieving full-employment.

5. Some issues which were highlighted during the discussion:

o The meeting underscored the importance for ASEM partners to further discuss the ways and means in addressing the issue of training and employability.

36

o The meeting recognized the need for national policies to figure out programs and methods to activate the labour force and better manage skills and qualifications.

o It is also shared by most delegates to address the need of institutional capacity building, also in adapting to technology advancement.

o The meeting also viewed the importance for ASEM partners to promote dialogue and cooperation on the training issues particularly on initial as well as life long learning to better address change and labour market mismatch.

o The meeting suggested that ASEM should strengthen the role of social partners in handling employment issues.

Social Protection

6. The discussion was chaired by the European Commission.Representatives from China, Denmark, and Germany providedpresentation on the issues relating to social protection, including CorporateSocial Responsibility (CSR). Following the presentations, delegatesdiscussed the broader context of Decent Work agenda, ILO definitions andstandards; strengthening regional and technical cooperation to implementdecent work; and Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) at the workplaceamong others.

7. The discussions pointed out a number of issues of interest:o The meeting urged the importance to have dialogue, exchange viewand information sharing between European and Asian countries inpromoting CSR at the national and international level.o Most delegates pointed out the need to extend social protectioncoverage and provide adequate protection in particular to workers ininformal sectors and other vulnerable workers.o It is also shared by the delegates that social security reform is key forpromoting growth and employment and for shaping the socialdimension of globalization while national government plays a key rolein implementing social protection system, together with otherstakeholders.

Labour Migration

8. The discussion was chaired by Pakistan. Three presentations weredelivered by representatives from the Philippines, Pakistan and EC.Delegates discussed various issues pertinent to labour migration, such asemployment and demographic change and migration within regions; Intra-Regional cooperation and shared responsibility on migration for mutualbenefits.

9. Some points that were highlighted during the discussion are:

o The need for a comprehensive approach to labour migration to maximize opportunity and minimize risk.

o the importance of developing mechanisms to protect migrant workers.

37

o To pursue dialogue on the issue of labour migration.

o To address the problem of brain drain including through encouraging short time assignments of high skilled/professional workers.

o Labour market management needs to be more effective.

Theme of the 2nd ASEM LEMC

10. To ensure the continuation from the 1st ASEM Labour and EmploymentMinisters’ Conference, the meeting decided that the theme for the 2nd

ASEM LEMC is “More and Better Jobs – Strengthening Partnership toTake Advantage from Global Labour Market toward Decent Work.”

ASEM Labour Cooperation Project

11. The meeting discussed a number of cooperation projects to be consideredfor possible implementation under the ASEM process. Under thisdiscussion, some delegates proposed cooperation projects, among others:

o social security for workers in the informal sectors;

o integration of migrant workers into the labour market;

o cooperation on capacity building in the field of vocational training;

o cooperation on Occupational Safety and Health (OSH);

o cooperation in the field of corporate social responsibility for the wellbeing of ASEM work forces.

Follow-up

12. Following a two-day substantial discussion on various labour andemployment issues, delegates highlighted the need for the 2nd ASEMLabour and Employment Ministers’ Meeting to come up with a strongappeal to take the ASEM dialogue and cooperation in the area of labourand employment a step forward.

13. Indonesia, as the host country of the 2nd ASEM Labour and EmploymentMinisters’ Conference will prepare and circulate a proposed draft Ministers’Declaration to ASEM members for comments prior to the Bali Meeting.

14. Delegates agreed on the need to establish a formal Senior Official Meeting(SOM) for the ASEM Dialogue in Labour and Employment and called uponASEM coordinators to give appropriate follow up to this request.

15. Delegates recalled the Potsdam and Helsinki call for the involvement ofsocial partners. Delegates welcomed the announcement by the EuropeanCommission to host the first ASEM Social Partners Forum in February/March 2008.

16. The meeting underlined the importance of involving stake holders in theprocess of ASEM dialogue on labour and employment. Delegates tooknote of the wish of social partners to be involved in an appropriate way in

38

the ASEM framework for the forthcoming events.

ANNEX IV

Summary report of the 1st ASEM Social Partners Forum, Brussels, 30 June – 1 July 2008

How to make globalisation a success for all ?Social partner contributions to the ASEM processEXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The 1st ASEM Labour and Employment Ministers Conference held in September 2006 in Potsdam, Germany, initiated a new dialogue and cooperation between Asia and Europe on employment and social policy. While underlining the importance of a close and productive dialogue in this field and welcoming the exchange of best practices on labour market and employment policies and social protection in the ASEM context, Ministers recommended that further cooperation in this area should involve the social partners and other relevant actors in an appropriate way. At their 2006 ASEM Summit meeting in Helsinki, Finland, Heads of State discussed on globalisation and the opportunities and challenges that it is bringing about both in Asia and Europe. In this context, and in their related Declaration on the Future of ASEM, they highlighted the importance of the first ASEM Labour and Employment Ministers’ Conference and its results and called for a sustained substantive dialogue and cooperation on employment and social policy, including with social partners.

In response to the above mandates to promote the active involvement of social partners in the ASEM process, the European Commission hosted a first ASEM Social Partners Forum on 30 June – 1 July 2008 in Brussels. This Forum - the first event ever of this kind, bringing together social partner representatives from more than 40 countries in Asia and Europe – had been organised jointly with the European and international social partner organisations (BUSINESSEUROPE, ETUC, IOE, ITUC). The Commission associated to the Forum the EU Presidency, successively held by the Slovenian Ministry of Labour, Family and Social Affairs and the French Ministry of Labour, Social Relations, Family and Solidarity, as well as the Indonesian Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration. The Forum provided a new, unique opportunity for social partners from Asia and Europe to get to know each other; share information and best practice on policy priorities and social dialogue practices in the context of globalisation; formulate expectations concerning the ASEM process in general and the ASEM dialogue on employment and social policy in particular; discuss on the role of social partners in those processes and their possible further contributions to them; and hold in-depth discussions in a number of thematic areas, including: qualifications, training and employability; employment creation and flexicurity; poverty reduction, social protection and social cohesion; and working conditions and quality of work.

The Forum brought together some 150 participants, including more than 100 socialpartner representatives from ASEM member countries and European and international social partner organisations. The Forum was first and foremost the forum of the social partners, and keynote speakers from social partner organisations included: Mr Sharad Patil, Secretary General of the Employers’ Federation of India; Mr Guy Ryder, General Secretary of ITUC; Mr Rekson Silaban, General Chairman of the Indonesia Prosperity Trade Union; Mr Emmanuel Julien, Deputy Director for Social Affairs at MEDEF; Mr Thamrin Mossie, President of the Confederation of Indonesian Trade Unions; Mr Jørgen Rønnest, Director for Social Affairs at BUSINESSEUROPE; Mr Nam-Hong Cho, Senior Advisor to the Korea Employers Federation; and Mr John Monks, General Secretary of ETUC. The opening and closing sessions of the Forum were also

39

attended by government representatives, including: Ms Marjeta Cotman, Minister of Labour, Family and Social Affairs of Slovenia; Mr Vladimir Špidla, European Commissioner in charge of Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities; Mr Karel De Gucht, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Belgium; and Mr Riphat Kesoema, Ambassador of Indonesia to the EU.

The Forum gave a very encouraging message and delivered a strong political signal of theinterest of social partners, from both Asia and Europe, to be involved in the ASEM process. By enabling a first exchange of information, experience and best practice among social partners from Europe and Asia the Forum helped develop common understanding and common language, identify common priorities and formulate consensus views where appropriate. It showed in particular that, despite disparities in legal settings and institutional structures as well as in the levels of development both within and between the two regions, Europe and Asia can benefit from an enhanced policy dialogue on a number of shared concerns and common policy challenges:first, the need to face common global trends such as globalisation, technological change and environmental degradation;second, a common commitment to promote economic and social progress in parallel, including through appropriate employment and social policies, good industrial relations, social partnership and social dialogue, including as a means to build consensus and ensure public support for reform and adaptation to change; third, a joint emphasis on the need to ensure a fair allocation of the benefits of globalisation and strengthen its social dimension, promote social responsibility and social cohesion, address rising inequalities and reduce poverty, labour market segmentation and social exclusion, and promote decent work as key for sustainable development.

The Forum highlighted useful factors of success for tackling the above challenges,including: trust and confidence between institutionalised actors, notably government and social partners; long-term policy orientations aimed at sustainable socio-economic development; an adequate institutional framework and sufficient resources to ensure the effective implementation of national laws and internationally recognised core labour rights, including the freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining. The Forum was conceived to pave the way for the involvement of social partners in the ASEM process. Forum participants underlined the strong interest in further developing the relations between EU and Asian social partners, both at bipartite and tripartite level, building on the climate of confidence and the common language of this 1st ASEM Social Partners Forum and supported through capacity building measures where appropriate.

The conclusions of the Forum debates highlighted the following perspectives regarding the future involvement of social partners in the ASEM process: There is a general need and wish to promote and further develop social partner exchange and consultations as well as social dialogue at intra-regional and international level. It would be useful to strengthen the capacity of social partners in this respect. There is consensus on the added value of involving social partners in the ASEM process. It would be useful to invite social partner contributions to relevant future ASEM meetings and recognise their role in the conclusions of those meetings. ASEM would benefit in particular from developing appropriate exchanges and consultations with social partners, for example in the context of the biannual meetings of ASEM Labour and Employment Ministers and other relevant ASEM meetings as appropriate. ASEM would also benefit from involving social partners in future cooperation projects to be carried out in the ASEM framework, including in those to be identified at the Bali ministerial meeting.

As a follow-up to this successful 1st ASEM Social Partners Forum, it is recommended to organise regular events of this type and to fully integrate them into the ASEM process. It is suggested to hold a 2nd ASEM Social Partners Forum in 2010.

40

The European Commission, together with the French EU Presidency and the Indonesian Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration, represented by the Ambassador of the Republic of Indonesia to the EU, took note of the results of this Forum, including the suggested perspectives for the involvement of social partners in the ASEM process, and pledged to take them into account in the preparation of the next ministerial meeting in Bali and the ASEM Summit in Beijing, and with a view to promote the exchange of views and/or other forms of consultations or involvement of the social partners in relation to future ASEM meetings and cooperation activities.

DETAILED SUMMARY REPORT

1. Introduction

The 1st ASEM Labour and Employment Ministers Conference held in September 2006 in Potsdam, Germany, initiated a new dialogue and cooperation between Asia and Europe on employment and social policy. While underlining the importance of a close and productive dialogue in this field and welcoming the exchange of best practices on labour market and employment policies and social protection in the ASEM context, Ministers recommended that further cooperation in this area should involve the social partners and other relevant actors in an appropriate way.

At their 2006 ASEM Summit meeting in Helsinki, Finland, Heads of State discussed on globalisation and the opportunities and challenges that it is bringing about both in Asia and Europe. In this context, and in their related Declaration on the Future of ASEM, they highlighted the importance of the first ASEM Labour and Employment Ministers’ Conference and its results and called for a sustained substantive dialogue and cooperation on employment and social policy, including with social partners. In response to the above mandates to promote the active involvement of social partners in the ASEM process, the European Commission hosted a first ASEM Social Partners Forum on 30 June – 1 July 2008 in Brussels. This Forum - the first event ever of this kind, bringing together social partner representatives from more than 40 countries in Asia and Europe – had been organised jointly with the European and international social partner organizations (BUSINESSEUROPE, ETUC, IOE, ITUC). The Commission associated to the Forum the EU Presidency, successively held by the Slovenian Ministry of Labour, Family and Social Affairs and the French Ministry of Labour, Social Relations, Family and Solidarity, as well as the Indonesian Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration. The Forum provided a new, unique opportunity for social partners from Asia and Europe to get to know each other; share information and best practice on policy priorities and social dialogue practices in the context of globalisation; formulate expectations concerning the ASEM process in general and the ASEM dialogue on employment and social policy in particular; discuss on the role of social partners in those processes and their possible further contributions to them; and hold in-depth discussions in a number of thematic areas, including: qualifications, training and employability; employment creation and flexicurity; poverty reduction, social protection and social cohesion; and working conditions and quality of work.

The Forum brought together some 150 participants, including more than 100 social partner representatives from ASEM member countries and European and international social partner organisations. The Forum was first and foremost the forum of the social partners, and keynote speakers from social partner organisations included: Mr Sharad Patil, Secretary General of the Employers’ Federation of India; Mr Guy Ryder, General Secretary of ITUC; Mr Rekson Silaban, General Chairman of the Indonesia Prosperity Trade Union; Mr Emmanuel Julien, Deputy Director for Social Affairs at MEDEF; Mr Thamrin Mossie, President of the Confederation of Indonesian Trade Unions; Mr Jørgen

41

Rønnest, Director for Social Affairs at BUSINESSEUROPE; Mr Nam-Hong Cho, Senior Advisor to the Korea Employers Federation; and Mr John Monks, General Secretary of ETUC. The opening and closing sessions of the Forum were also attended by government representatives, including: Ms Marjeta Cotman, Minister of Labour, Family and Social Affairs of Slovenia; Mr Vladimir Špidla, European Commissioner in charge of Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities; Mr Karel De Gucht, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Belgium; and Mr Riphat Kesoema, Ambassador of Indonesia to the EU.

2. The social dimension of ASEM

The opening session discussed recent developments and future ways to “strengthen the new ASEM dialogue and cooperation on employment and social policy to help make globalization a success for all“. The session was chaired by Ms Petra Pinzler, journalist at the German weekly Die Zeit in Berlin; it included: opening addresses by Commissioner Špidla, Ambassador Riphat Kesoema and Minister Cotman; a keynote presentation on the social dimension of ASEM by Professor Peter Mayer from the University of Applied Sciences in Osnabrück, Germany; and a panel discussion involving high-level social partner representatives from Asia and Europe. Participants widely agreed on the key role that ASEM can play in the context of globalisation. Representing more than 60% of the world population and labour force and of economic exchanges at global level, and more than 50% of world GDP, decisions that are taken and consensus that is reached within ASEM have weight in the globalised economy, and efforts to strengthen the social dimension of ASEM are likely to have a wider impact.

Against this background participants welcomed the increasing attention that the ASEM process has been paying to the social pillar, as highlighted by the recent launch of new ministerial dialogues in the areas of employment and education, and the request – endorsed in the 2006 Helsinki Declaration on the Future of ASEM - for strengthening the involvement of social partners and other stakeholders in those dialogues. Participants agreed that measures to ensure a fair allocation of the benefits of globalisation and reduce poverty, including through the promotion of decent work, were key for sustainable socio-economic development. As highlighted by Professor Mayer in his keynote presentation, the ASEM process can contribute in an important way to shaping globalisation, including trough its influence on the work and priorities of international organisations and through improving the national policies of ASEM member countries on the basis of an exchange of best practices. To be effective, however, there is a need to reinforce institutional mechanisms within ASEM to address social issues and promote a constructive involvement of social partners - since social progress was not just the work of governments but also that of social partners. Cooperation in a number of areas also needs to be upgraded, including on: international labour standards, labour market reform, social security provision, education and human resource investment, financial market regulation, trade liberalisation and corporate social responsibility practices.

Commissioner Špidla highlighted the need for joint responses to address the new trends of growing inequalities both between and within countries and to mitigate the negative impact of financial market turbulence and rising food prices. Social partners have a key role in helping ensure a fair distribution of the gains of globalisation and in particular in promoting decent work for all – a shared objective for both Europe and Asia. The recent ILO Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalisation is a good example of how Europe and Asia can shape globalisation if they accord on common strategies and policy priorities. Commissioner Špidla further recalled the European experience with social dialogue – including Treaty-based rights for social partners for information and consultation - as one of the key factors of European economic governance and competitiveness. He welcomed the increasing interest, including from Asia, in the European model and experience with its integrated approach to economic development, social progress and environmental protection.

42

While noting the important disparities in economic development between Europe and Asia, Ambassador Riphat Kesoema underlined the need to take into account the social dimension since globalisation influences the relationship among nations and reshapes the economic and social order of every single state. He confirmed the Indonesian government's openness to cooperating in the international arena to develop jointly, based on a partnership approach, new mechanisms to create a fair globalisation and promote decent work, while supporting people to readjust their activities in order to minimize any detrimental effects of globalisation.

Minister Cotman welcomed the quick development of the ASEM dialogue on employment and social policy over recent years and highlighted the importance of a closer cooperation between the EU and Asia to address the challenges of our time, notably globalisation and climate change, building on a constructive social dialogue at all levels as a precondition for success. She welcomed that the ASEM Social Partners Forum provided for an exchange of best practice between the EU and Asian countries, inviting social partners from Asia and Europe to stress common goals, notably with regard to labour standards, the protection of workers, the promotion of decent work and the fight against social exclusion.

Social partner representatives from Asia and Europe agreed that it was time to broaden thenational and international policy agendas and strengthen cooperation to promote flexicurity and sustainable development and better address problems such as low skills, disappointing job creation records and lack of employability, persistent poverty, lack of social security notably for workers in the informal economy, lack of access to social services, and increasing imbalances in the global economy. Other topics which would deserve more attention include law enforcement, working conditions in export processing zones and employment and social impacts of trade liberalisation.

Social partner representatives largely agreed on the added value which the ASEM dialogue can provide through exchange of information and best practices, including e.g. on the European experiences in translating economic growth into social development and pursuing both objectives in parallel. Such exchange should be complemented by concrete cooperation projects. While not shying away from less consensual topics, agreement should be sought on a list of common priority areas in which to start cooperation. Participants largely agreed on the relevance of the topics suggested for the Bali ministerial meeting, while recalling that the ILO Decent Work agenda is a valid reference point for action to strengthen the social dimension of globalisation and that the ILO's capacity needs to be further reinforced in this area. The Decent Work agenda needs to be adapted to the local context which is where social partners can intervene most usefully and play an important role. Independent social partners and institutionalised social dialogue and tripartite governance structures were considered of particular importance in this respect.

According to the trade union representatives on the panel this first ASEM Social Partners Forum responded in part to the long-standing criticism of trade unions on the lack of a social dimension of the ASEM process and on the imbalance of the ASEM process, missing to involve worker representatives while organising regular business summits in the margin of the biannual ASEM summits. ITUC Secretary-General Guy Ryder called for the establishment of a corresponding institutional mechanism for consultation of the trade union movement within ASEM. Rekson Silaban, chairman of the Indonesia Prosperity Trade Union, expressed his wish that the Indonesian government would invite social partners to participate in the 2nd ASEM Labour and Employment Ministers Conference in October 2008 in Bali and push for the adoption of an institutionalised status of social partner consultations within the ASEM process.

43

3. The role of social partners

The second session discussed European and Asian experiences of industrial relations and social dialogue and the role of social partners in the ASEM process. The session was cochaired by Mr Ridwan Sijabat, journalist at The Jakarta Post, and Mr Richard Werly, European Affairs correspondent at Geneva-based daily Le Temps; it included: a video presentation on the European social dialogue; interventions by Mr Jackie Morin, Head of Unit for Industrial Relations and Social Dialogue in the European Commission, Mr Alan Boulton, Director of the ILO Regional Office in Jakarta, and Mr Ariel Castro, Assistant General Secretary of the ASEAN Trade Union Council; and a panel discussion involving social partner representatives from Asia and Europe.

Participants welcomed the initiative by the European Commission to host this first ever meeting between European and Asian social partner representatives in the context of the ASEM process, and they expressed the wish that it would be continued. As in the opening session, participants agreed that ASEM provides a strong framework for social partners to discuss on common priority topics and exchange best practices. Given the key role of social partners in the negotiation, design and implementation of employment and social policies in most ASEM member countries, they underlined that social partner involvement in the ASEM process in general and in the new ASEM dialogue on employment and social policy in particular is necessary to ensure success with regard to both the effective follow-up of recommendations and the implementation of future concrete cooperation projects. Participants further stressed that - despite the differences in the institutional basis and labour law provisions, in the coverage and topics addressed, as well as in the underlying values and beliefs - social dialogue is not specific to any of the two regions, Europe or Asia, and it is indispensable to sustainable development in both regions. Discussions covered in particular the social dialogue experiences in the EU and in selected Asian countries such as India,Malaysia and Singapore. As highlighted by Mr Jackie Morin (European Commission) and EU-level social partner representatives, in the EU social dialogue is an important policy instrument with institutional foundations in Treaties and labour laws. It promotes a constructive dialogue at various levels (European, national or regional; cross-industry, sectoral or multisectoral; etc.) and contributes effectively to improving industrial relations and creating norms and standards which are to be implemented and respected in all EU member states. The European experience also shows that one need to work in parallel on topics and institutions and that strong, institutionalised actors and decision making structures are needed for success, while respecting the autonomy of social partners. It further shows that constructive agreements can be reached between social partners based on shared interests - and this despite sometimes seemingly diverging interests at the start of negotiations. Joint multi-annual work programmes between the social partners have proven particularly useful to identify the shared interests of the social partners. More generally, strong and independent social partner organisations with voluntary membership are seen a pre-condition for successful social dialogue.

In Asia, as highlighted by Mr Alan Boulton (ILO) and Mr Ariel Castro (ASEAN Trade Union Council), both topical coverage and effectiveness of social dialogue remain somewhat different from that in Europe. They recalled that only few countries in Asia – including Japan, Indonesia, the Philippines and Cambodia - have ratified ILO convention 87 on freedom of association and that the institutional structures of both, workers’ and employers’ organisations, tend to remain weak. Challenges ahead include in particular: reducing the informality of large parts of the Asian economies; addressing increasing inequality trends and contributing to poverty reduction as a key to making globalisation sustainable; fostering employment creation and strengthening the capacity of labour market institutions, including through an improved awareness of existing labour legislation among workers and improved enforcement of existing laws; encouraging governments to hold more regular consultations and discussions with social partners; and

44

strengthening tripartite institutions, social dialogue and involvement of trade unions and other relevant NGOs in decision making and law enforcement - including possibly through the establishment of an ASEAN Economic and Social Committee and a formal consultative status within ASEAN for trade unions, e.g. through an ASEAN Labour Advisory Council.

Mr Alan Boulton (ILO) further highlighted that a stronger dialogue on those issues, as foreseen e.g. in the new ILO-ASEAN cooperation agreement, would also be very helpful. A reinforced EU assistance in these areas, notably for ASEAN countries, would be appreciated and could in particular support ASEAN in making its first steps towards an ASEAN Community.

Further measures were considered necessary to effectively involve social partners in the ASEM dialogue process, including: capacity building measures helping social partners play their legal role in implementing laws and ensuring information, consultation and awareness raising where appropriate; a re-assessment of existing policy instruments; the development of new, parallel policy initiatives e.g. on regional qualification frameworks; and improved labour inspection.

Subsequent discussions addressed a series of issues including: the ‘uniqueness’ of the European social model; possible lessons which Europe can learn from the Asian experiences; the need to build trust and confidence between the social partners; the links between economic progress and social progress; the need to balance rights and obligations; appropriate ways to ensure a constructive social dialogue taking into account the dependence of labour relations on the economic cycle; the need for a flexible system of labour relations and social dialogue institutions, adapted to the national traditions and level of development; the need for independent expertise and institutional capacity on both sides; the need for actors to be credible in their requirements and to take into account of the wider socio-economic impacts of their requests and agreements.

The session made clear that social dialogue was in place both in Europe and Asia, and that it is not a ‘unique’ European experience. However, institutional structures, outcomes and effectiveness were seen to vary widely between the two regions, as well as within the two regions. There was in particular wide agreement that, although the European experience is an interesting and instructive one, there is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ solution and the European model cannot be transmitted to Asia, but that Asian countries have to develop their own models of social dialogue, depending on their traditions and levels of economic development. Asian participants, both workers’ and employers’ representatives, further underlined the very manifest lack of capacity in the area of social dialogue in Asia and that support for capacity building and strengthening of social partners would be a welcome area for cooperation in the ASEM context.

4. Topical sessions

In-depth discussions in a number of thematic areas of particular interest to social partners took place in parallel sessions. They covered the following issues: (a) qualifications, training and employability; (b) poverty reduction, social protection and social cohesion; (c) working conditions and quality of work; and (d) employment creation and flexicurity. The sessions were moderated by: (a) Mr Jens Bjornavold, Head of the Brussels office of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (CEDFEOP); (b) Mr Alan Boulton, Director of the ILO Regional Office in Jakarta; (c) Mr Youngmo Yoon, Director of the Korea Labour and Society Institute; and (d) Mr Eric Oechslin, Adviser of the International Organisation of Employers. In each session, social partner representatives from Asia and Europe made keynote presentations, followed by an open discussion.

45

a. Qualification, training and employability

The discussion underlined a number of common concerns, challenges and policy priorities for Europe and Asia. It highlighted the increasing internationalisation of qualification and education issues, including the development of intra-regional qualification frameworks and the identification of common benchmarks. In times of globalisation, there is no room anymore for self-sufficient national or even regional education systems, with global standards and questions regarding recognition and portability of qualifications becoming ever more important. While education and qualification are key investments in support of both economic competitiveness and social inclusion and social cohesion, however, there is evidence of decreasing investments by companies in training and lifelong learning. Both the state and other actors, notably multinational companies and social partners, need to develop solutions to address this problem of under-investment in education and training.

Participants agreed that the EU and Asia share a number of common policy challenges in this area, including: promoting inclusive education systems and ensuring access to education for all; developing informal learning and focussing on learning outcomes more than on traditionally defined inputs; encouraging lifelong learning combined with new, adequate working time models; developing new approaches based on individual rights to and shared responsibilities for education and lifelong learning; increasing awareness of the rights and benefits of training, e.g. through UK-type ‘union learning representatives’; ensuring adequate funding and effective cost-sharing; addressing disparities in education opportunities (formal vs. informal economy workers; regular vs. irregular employees; small and medium-sized vs. large companies; employed vs. unemployed; etc); improving the recognition and transferability of informal learning outcomes; ensuring and improving the quality of education and training; and addressing persisting mismatches between vocational training on the one hand and employment and career development on the other, including through the promotion of dual training systems, the upgrading of vocational training and an increased cooperation between education and industrial policy.

Participants agreed on the key role that social partners have for the design and implementation of education policies, notably in relation to lifelong learning policies, not only for career and employment purposes, but also to promote personal development and active citizenship. They underlined the need to strengthen the participation of social partners in the governance of training programmes and to strengthen related tripartite bodies. Participants further agreed that the area of qualification, training and employability is a good area for defining concrete cooperation projects to be carried out in the ASEM process.

b. Poverty reduction, social protection and social inclusion

The discussion on this relatively broad topic started by recalling the related international commitments including the new reference to the role of decent work as one of the MDG targets, the 2008 conclusions of the UN Commission for Social Development on the need for extending social protection, and the recent ILO Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalisation. Both the EU and Asia are confronted with problems of poverty, labour market segmentation and social exclusion. The discussion focussed on three issues: first, the increasing international attention to the necessary extension of social protection and social security coverage, including to the informal sector of the economy; second, the key role of social partners for policy design and reform in this area; and third, possible technical assistance and cooperation projects in the area of social protection and social security between the EU and Asia.

46

Participants agreed on the key role of employment creation and decent work for poverty reduction. Productive employment and decent work were considered the most efficient way out of poverty, while social protection systems were seen most useful in providing support during short-term adjustments and in promoting active inclusion. There was, on the other hand, some controversy around the impact of free trade and further trade liberalisation on poverty reduction. While most EU social partners saw free trade, accompanied by adequate adjustment measures where appropriate, as a chance for promoting development, Asian trade unionists expressed strong concerns about the impact of free trade on socio-economic development in Asian countries.

Participants agreed on the added value of experience sharing between the EU and Asia in this area, where the European experience could be of particular interest for Asia. While the build-up and reform of social protection and social security systems in Asia has to take into account the national traditions and levels of development, participants highlighted some conditions for developing social security systems: the insight that an inclusive society is desirable both ethically and in terms of socio-economic stability and sustainability; the agreement that the benefits of growth should be shared between all stakeholders; and the need for regulation and state intervention, combined with a strong involvement of social partners. Participants also agreed widely on the need to strengthen the involvement of communities and the empowerment of people to fight poverty and social exclusion, as exemplified by a good practice example on empowering self employed women in India. Capacity building measures to strengthen all relevant actors were seen as vital in this context. Participants finally agreed that this area provides strong opportunities for cooperation between the EU and Asia, and notably ASEAN, with a view to developing minimum standards.

c. Working conditions and quality of work

Discussions in this session addressed the perceived erosion of wages and working conditions in Europe and Asia, combined with reduced access to benefits and training, and increasing trends of employment uncertainty and income inequality. These trends reflect in part new forms of work and contract types, both in the EU and Asia, and they affect both workers and employers. Participants highlighted that migrant workers are suffering most from these trends. Participants regretted that businesses focus increasingly on short-term goals and workers are under-investing in qualification and lifelong learning. Participants agreed on the need to strengthen minimum wages, health and safety standards and equal pay principles. Various instruments are in place, including ILO conventions and the ILO Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalisation.

To build confidence and make progress, both legislation and social partner involvement, including trans-national and global agreements, were considered as key instruments. As in the other sessions, participants highlighted the need for capacity building, strengthening in particular governmental capacity for labour inspection and the effective enforcement of existing laws as well as the capacity of social partners. As in the other sessions, participants also stressed the added value of exchanging experiences between the EU and Asia on these issues, and notably on the development and effective implementation of common minimum standards; in addition, participants highlighted the need for strengthened cooperation and sharing of experience between Asian countries.

d. Employment creation and flexicurity

The session discussed ways to promote a new balance between employment flexibility and security and thus foster human resources investment and employment creation. It was recalled that the flexicurity approach cannot offer a unique policy model, and that in particular the Danish flexicurity model cannot be implemented wholesale in other, notably

47

Asian countries, but that the flexicurity policies need to be adapted to the local conditions.

It remains unclear to what extent the flexicurity approach can offer solutions to the problems of economies with large informal sectors and smaller public budgets. The session discussed particular experiences of flexicurity policies and challenges for three countries: Thailand, Singapore and Finland. Singapore e.g. combines high degrees of contractual flexibility and performance-based pay with contributions-based security through health care, housing and pensions; trade unions are involved on the governing boards of social security organisations and in providing training to workers, financed through contributions from workers and government budget. Finland is an example of a small, open economy that has been successfully managing globalisation pressures, based on a tradition of strong industrial relations, independent negotiations between social partners and government support to the implementation of their agreements. Thailand, moreover, was presented as an example of a country where the social and economic preconditions for a shift to a Danish ‘golden triangle’ model are not present. Participants agreed on the need to move from job security to employment security while avoiding the emergence of precarious employment, and to strengthen social protection and social dialogue. Social partners have to play a key role in this context, based on trust and cooperation, supporting the design and implementation of flexicurity policies.

Common conclusions in all of the above topical sessions include: the importance of these topics and the need to address them at the Bali ministerial meeting or other relevant ASEM meetings; the recognition of the added value of sharing experiences in these policy areas between the EU and Asia; the agreement on the key role of social dialogue and social partners for the design and implementation of the respective policies; and the need for concrete cooperation projects and capacity building activities in the ASEM framework in these areas. In two sessions, participants also recommended to strengthen EU-Asia cooperation with a view to developing common minimum standards.

5. Conclusions and follow-up

The closing session reviewed the main results of the two-day discussions and aimed at formulating policy perspectives and recommendations to “strengthen future EU-Asia strategic cooperation on global labour market issues and decent work”. The session was chaired by Mr Jean-Paul Tricart, Head of Unit for International Affairs and Enlargement at the European Commission; it included: summary reports by the moderators of the parallel topical discussions; final statements by high-level social partner representatives from Europe and Asia; and closing addresses by Ambassador Riphat Kesoema, Minister De Gucht and high level representatives from the current ASEM coordinators France and China.

Mr Thamrin Mossie, President of the Confederation of Indonesian Trade Unions (CITU) recalled that the goal of strengthening the social dimension of globalisation goes well beyond job creation and the provision of health and education; it also relates to the challenges to share the benefits of globalisation, ensure the respect of core labour and social rights, promote decent work conditions and social security for all, including for migrant workers, and fight poverty and social exclusion. He welcomed the 1st ASEM Social Partners Forum as an important step in the right direction and asked the Indonesian government, on behalf of Asian trade unions, to invite social partners to the 2nd ASEM Labour and Employment Ministers Conference in October 2008 in Bali.

Mr Jørgen Rønnest, Director for European Affairs at BUSINESSEUROPE, welcomed the opportunity provided by the Forum to exchange practices among social partners and formulate expectations and suggestions concerning the ASEM dialogue on employment

48

and social policy. One important conclusion of the discussions is the focus on change and the need for continued reform, both in Europe and Asia, and the recognition of the need to help people and businesses to adjust to change; this is an area where social partners can play a key role and make an important contribution to related reform processes. Social partners have a key role to play to build trust and confidence as prerequisites for reform, and to ensure the necessary support for reform processes among firms, workers and voters.

Mr Nam-Hong Cho, Senior Advisor to the Korea Employers Federation (KEF) also thanked the Forum organisers for their initiative and stated that it could be instrumental in enhancing EU-Asia cooperation in the future. He stated that while the value of social dialogue cannot be over-emphasized, it is not a panacea for sustainable development of modern societies; instead a broader approach to social responsibility going beyond social dialogue is needed – an approach which would cover all actors, support good governance and enable the parallel development of decent work and sustainable productivity growth: Employers should make an effort to improve business ethics and strengthen good governance; workers and trade unions anticipate and support change and reforms and develop new forms of work ethics; and governments ensure effective law enforcement and promote social dialogue.

Mr John Monks, General Secretary of the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), thanked the Forum organisers for this first initiative to help implement the 2006 Helsinki ASEM Summit mandate to involve social partners in the ASEM process; the initiative was seen to respond to long-standing trade union requests to strengthen the social dimension of ASEM. Despite remaining diverging views and problems in Europe regarding the appropriate balance between free market provisions and respect for fundamental rights, he agreed that ASEM can play an important role for the promotion of decent work at global level, including through the implementation of universal social protection to fight poverty and exclusion; the protection of migrant workers’ rights; the strengthening of social dialogue; and the uptake of the social dimension in all EU-Asia trade, political and economic relations. While stressing the constructive approach of European trade unions to globalisation, he highlighted the need to ensure a fair distribution of its benefits not least to ensure public support to the process of globalisation and to avoid an increasing ‘retreat into protectionist economic nationalism’. Mr Monks asked for a regular follow-up to this Forum and for its full integration into the ASEM process, emphasizing the importance of giving equal status to business and workers in the ASEM process and of holding a joint social partners consultation with the Bali ministerial meeting in October 2008.

Ms Agnès Leclerc underlined the commitment of the French EU Presidency for a social Europe, and for an improved social governance of globalisation. In this context, she highlighted the key role of the ILO Decent Work agenda and notably the effective application of ratified ILO conventions and the promotion of social protection, and she in particular welcomed the recent ILO Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalisation. Further work is needed to develop decent work indicators and improve the knowledge basis. She argued that socio-economic progress depends increasingly on social dialogue, including at European level, and stressed the need for freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining. The Forum constitutes a positive signal in this regard, and it would be useful to ensure the follow-up of its discussions at the Bali ministerial meeting.

Minister De Gucht welcomed this Forum as a rare occasion to address globalisation in a meaningful, constructive and not just negative way, with a focus on the key issue on how globalisation relates to global inequality. He welcomed that it allowed in addition to promote ‘the much needed input of social partners’ to formulate common answers to the common challenges brought about by globalisation. He underlined that, while protectionism cannot be an answer to concerns regarding the consequences of

49

globalisation, the further development of open trade regimes and globalisation, and its impact of poverty reduction and social development, would depend on the ability to making globalisation a success for all and having a positive impact on world inequality. Accordingly, ‘the yardstick for every global trend such as globalisation should be how it contributes to the global well-being’. In this context, Minister De Gucht stressed the need to complement existing social dialogue at national level with social dialogue and exchange of best practices at international level. He also underlined the potential added value of challenging the global consensus, regretting that the alter globalist movement seems to have lost its momentum over the last few years.

The representatives from Indonesia and China welcomed the Forum as an innovative framework for constructive discussions between social partners and their involvement in the ASEM dialogue on ways to support a fair globalisation, promote decent work and strengthen the social dimension of globalisation. While recalling the need to take into account the diversity among ASEM countries in terms of culture, political systems and levels of economic development, both underlined the increasing interdependence of ASEM economies and the ensuing need for stronger cooperation between governments, together with social partners and other civil society groups, in the design and implementation of socio-economic policies. In China the set-up of sound industrial relations and harmonious labour relations remains a policy priority, as exemplified by recent developments in this area: the establishment of tripartite consultation institutions at national and regional level; the establishment of trade unions in multinational companies since 2006, and the adoption of new labour contract and labour dispute mediation and arbitration laws in 2007.

Both Indonesia and China expressed their wish that the issues discussed at the Forum would be taken up and deepened in further exchanges at bipartite and tripartite level - in the context of ASEM as well as in other inter-regional fora - and that concrete cooperation projects would be implemented together with social partners.

Mr Riphat Kesoema, Ambassador of the Republic of Indonesia to the European Union, agreed that the outcomes of this 1st ASEM Social Partners Forum can be invaluable inputs for the 2nd ASEM Labour and Employment Ministers Conference and confirmed the Indonesian government’s interest in seeing positive engagement of social partners within the appropriate ASEM framework of cooperation in the near future.

In his concluding remarks Mr Jean-Paul Tricart, Head of Unit for International Affairs in the European Commission's Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities, recalled that the organisation of this Forum – the first ever of its kind – had been a real challenge, given the need to identify the expectations and interests of social partners not only from Europe and Asia, but also within the regions concerned. He thanked all those who supported the organisation of the Forum, including in particular the European and international social partner organisations (BUSINESSEUROPE, ETUC, IOE, ITUC), the Friedrich Ebert Foundation, the International Labour Organisation and the journalists, expert speakers and social partner representatives who accepted to participate and intervene in the Forum discussions. He also noted the continued support to the Commission's initiative from the Slovenian and French EU Presidencies as well as from Indonesia and China as coordinators on the Asian side.

He welcomed the very encouraging message of the Forum which underlined a series of common priorities and delivered a strong political signal of the interest of social partners from both Asia and Europe to be involved in the ASEM process. The Forum also helped further develop common understanding, common wording and, in some cases, formulate consensus views. It provided a good basis for a first exchange of information, experience and best practice and showed that, despite the disparities in legal settings, institutional structures and levels of development, Europe and Asia are actually sharing a great

50

number of concerns and can benefit from an enhanced policy dialogue and cooperation on a number of shared concerns and common policy challenges: first, the need to face common global trends such as globalisation, technological change and environmental degradation; second, a common commitment to promote economic and social progress in parallel, including through appropriate employment and social policies, good industrial relations, social partnership and social dialogue - including as a means to build consensus and ensure public support for reform and adaptation to change - based on pre-conditions such as trust, long-term policy orientations, an adequate institutional framework, and an effective implementation of national laws and internationally recognised core labour rights, including the freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining; and third, a joint emphasis on the need to ensure a fair allocation of the benefits of globalisation and strengthen its social dimension, promote social responsibility and social cohesion, address rising inequalities and reduce poverty, labour market segmentation and social exclusion, and promote decent work as key for sustainable development.

The Forum underlined the strong interest in further developing the relations between EU and Asian social partners, building on the climate of confidence and the common language of this 1st ASEM Social Partners Forum. It provided perspectives for the further development of appropriate exchanges and consultations with the social partners in the ASEM process, including for example: social partner consultations in relation to future ASEM meetings; the involvement of social partners in future cooperation projects to be carried out in the ASEM framework; and the organisation of follow-up events to this 1st

ASEM Social Partners Forum.

The European Commission, together with the French EU Presidency and the Indonesian Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration, represented by the Ambassador of the Republic of Indonesia to the EU, took note of the results of this Forum, including the suggested perspectives for the involvement of social partners in the ASEM process, and pledged to take them into account in the preparation of the next ministerial meeting in Bali and the ASEM Summit in Beijing, and with a view to promote the exchange of views and/or other forms of consultations or involvement of the social partners in relation to future ASEM meetings and cooperation activities.

51